Just Another LSAT Diary

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Sat Aug 14, 2010 2:43 pm

Sorry it took me awhile to pick up on this. Rather than creating indivdual threads for each PT I'm doing, I'll just keep them in the same one. Today's journey is through PT38.

So I jumped ahead in the “10” Book after finishing PT32 to do PT38. Final result, timed was a 170, but I was annoyed by the number of questions that seemed recognizable from the LRB (although that didn’t help too much apparently on the first LR). Breakout was -5LR -1LG -4RC -2LR.

LR1 (#9, #14, #15, #21, #23)
#9 - How many times am I going to keep getting Q’s like these wrong where I miss the argument in question? Not looking for an alternate cause here, Scientists do believe the dust in the atmosphere had something to do with the extinction, now find the link! This wasn’t a weaken question, it was a resolve question. Argh!
#14 Ruled A, B, C out fairly quickly. Looking at E, I’m not sure why I chose it, since this argument is about vacations abroad.
#15 Had to refer back to the LRB on this one, and still missed it! Fell for the misleading crap (no pun intended). That’s what I get when trying to go fast.
#21 Last question I answered in this section, skipped the first time. Had A&D, went wrong and looking back it makes sense.
#23 Here’s another LRB one. This is a bad mistake. I should have this standard abstract situation presented in the stimulus down-pat by now. Time Pressure?

LG (#21)
#21 (Please, please, please let this be what PT61’s LG section will look like. My only error came on a misdiagram, because originally I wrote V-F/M when I meant to write V-L/M. Caught it to get the others right, but forgot to look back over 21. Also note to self: LSAC does test the same answer twice (see 22/24).

RC (#2, #16, #22, #24) Is it me or did this RC section suck?
#2 - How do I find the hetero/homo link of trees to answer 3 and 4 and then miss this Q? They all go together and I picked the stupid fire-tolerant one? Wtf?
Didn’t miss any in the second passage, but it still sucked, maybe less than the others, but still.
#16 Caught off by this. Was down to D/E, chose wrong? Apparently missed something here.
#22. This last passage sucked major portions, and if that was not bad enough, the laptop I use for the countdown clock decided to shut down and reboot with about 7 minutes to go in the section. I managed to get to the questions, but had to guess on this one. Got torn between A/B, but that was way off. How can they empathize with the stories if they don’t know how to empathize?
#24 They’re not counterproductive. And again, I question myself in how I can allow myself to miss this, while understanding the text and the author’s POV enough to answer Q27 correctly that he’s not totally against traditional ethics training?

LR (#23, #25)
#23 - Not sure when the last time was I made it this far without a miss. This section, coupled with some LRB repeats got annoying because I can’t really look at this score as improvement without some doubt. There was not really anything I found challenging until question 16, and I got the link. 21 also seemed rough between A and D, the way the stimulus was written seems to fit D. As for #23, though, forget it. By far the hardest question for me out of the entire two sections, and I ended up guessing. I tried diagramming this, trying to find the link I was supposed to between the two pieces of information, but struggled unsuccessfully.
#25 - I need a vocabulary boost or something. Reading LSAT questions tends to make me feel dumber. I know “Coherent” is equivalent to intelligible, but unfortunately I missed that word and the implication involved.

Overall, not bad, but I’m still highly skeptical to this outcome. For one, the LRB repeat questions (although I actually missed some), and second, the LG section was incredibly easy. I was shocked the scale was -12 on this one. RC was much more difficult than LG and the LR was very straightforward (more-so than the previous PT’s in the 10s and 20s I was taking. I hope this pattern continues, but I guess we’ll see. Tomorrow is PrepTest C from the SuperPrep Book.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Sun Aug 15, 2010 1:55 pm

This morning, instead of doing SuperPrep C, I stayed in the Last “10” Book and did PT37. To say I was gang-tackled by the last RC passage would be an understatement. Managed a 167 (-7RC :--( -3LR, -0LG!, -4LR). On the bright side, I’m moving well through LR and making progress.

RC (#9, #13, #15, #21, #24, #25, #26)
#9 - Bad, Bad, Miss. Upset I missed TCR here. I went with A. Careless Reading of the Answer choices.
#13 - This wording was ridiculous. Figured that TCR could not be B/C because it looked like the same thing, D definitely was out. Struggled between A&E, led by E because of the words “postulate” and “explain” in regards to developing a theory. Anybody have any insights on this one, would greatly be appreciated.
#15 - Another bad miss. Here I picked C, but if I used my reasoning from Q13, I should have been able to eliminate B/C because they were essentially wrong for the same reasons trying to sucker you in with the AA reference. D’s out of scope (American, not AA), and E’s flat out wrong. A was clearly the right answer here. Grrr!
#21 I struggled mightily on this except question. In a way, I thought all of them were mentioned. I thought the fourth paragraph had references to an answer for B in it, which is why POE didn’t do too much for me on this one. Anybody have some insights? I know the others questions are answered.
#24, #25, #26 - Okay, I obviously took a brain dump on this last passage. Reading the Q’s I had a WTF kind of mentality. I reread the passage and it made a little more sense. Understand my errors in #24 & #25. #26, however, is flat out awful. No way I would have caught that in time pressure. This passage just sucked.

LR1 (#17, #21, #26)
#17 - I still have a horrible time translating these “except” questions. E doesn’t explain the link, however D does explain the link that would probably lead to E. I can see why, but still have a hard time thinking quickly in terms why E is correct.
#21 - Complex PR questions in time pressure are becoming nearly impossible for me. I can get the similar structures, but on these, I feel the time crunch. This was the last Q I attempted (I’m following the first two, second two, fourth two, third two approach)
I get why TCR is right. Just having a hard time getting to it in time without panicking.
#26 - That wasn’t fair of LSAC to put this here (shouldn’t it be like #23 or something? Going through trying to match up frogs/lagoons owls/probably only eat frogs in the lagoon shouldn’t be too difficult. I see why TCR is right and why my answer is wrong (the island reference).

LG (-0)
Wow, I’m keeping PT37/38 for future warm-up practice. I think this is the first time I ever finished two games in 12 minutes! The first one was simple, and the second one may be one of the easiest made-to-look difficult games ever (after you get the Y/4 inference). I’ve seen enough of the third game type that I feel comfortable with those, and while the fourth game looked a little different, didn’t have too much of an issue with that. I hope this continues. It seems the difficulty of LG and my ability to finish all the games given my current accuracy on them is going to have a big effect on my overall score.

LR (#6, #9, #17, #20)
#6 Crap, I picked the opposite answer C. I thought only about the first experiment and overlooked the second!
#9 I fell for word choice with D. No theories say that. Bad miss.
#17 Another one of these alternate cause type answers I missed in “E”. If they were abnormally high, I guess the average would come back down on it’s own. I fell for B, but it’s irrelevant to the conclusion of speed limits reductions decreasing fatalities.
#20 I didn’t like TCR of A because of the word “primarily” in the stimulus. To me, it seems the author thought an action could exist in both ways, provided the “praise for self-interest” was not the primary factor.

Anyway, that’s all for today’s LSAT studying for me. I went over B & 38 last night, and will probably to C or 36 tomorrow. I feel like my LR is improving, but now I’m concerned that RC is tanking. And although I’ve been good at LG so far, I have the fear I’ll get caught up in a tough game that won’t allow me to finish the section. A lot of worries still, and all I really want to do is break 160.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Sat Aug 28, 2010 12:51 am

Due to work, traveling, and going home for leave, I decided to take a break for a few days that turned into a week (oops). I’ve finished all the early PT’s prior to 39 and am now working timed the rest of the way. I’m going to change up the order a little bit though because I wanted to take a more modern test, so I did PT 48 today. This was also a change of venue where I normally take my tests (in my hotel room) where I usually have peace and quiet versus taking at home where the relatives are driving me up the wall. But anyway..

164 in the timed zone. The curve sucks, although I could feel the questions were not as bad (still got the same amount I normally get wrong). However, if I can get this on test day, I’ll gladly take it. My breakout was -4LR1 -0LG -6RC -6LR

#10 - I don’t know what exactly scared me off of D. I had it and my wrong answer C to contend with and I think I thought too much into it. I guess because I thought D didn’t rule out that spending had indeed been increased on teacher salaries and need-based aid that other increases weren’t relevant. Sure, other costs may have increased more, but if the salaries/aid also increased, without knowing the amounts (other than that their less than other budgeted costs, doesn’t the admin still have some sort of leg to stand on?

#15 - This one makes me feel dumb. I chose exaggerated B, most likely because I didn’t carefully read A. I did not spend enough time on this Q.

#19 - I ruled B out, apparently because I missed the “who do research” connection and missed the alternate cause implication with the response. Nice to know I’m still in my pattern of missing alternate causes.

#24 - I had to go the search boards/Atlas for this one. I “get it”, but in a testing environment on the real thing, this is one where quickly deciphering the mutually exclusive joining/donating, etc would fly right over my head. This is my pick for hardest question in the section.

LG -0
I’m guessing the price we had to pay for the harsh scale was due to the easy LG section. The first two games were awesome. The third game was a spitting copy of that cars game I just did last week and so I had a chance to redeem myself. Game 4 was the most challenging. Luckily, by getting Q18, you can also get Q20, work the G>H limitation to get Q19, quickly draw up R10 R10 R6/12 for 22, leaving only Q21 to do hypo. It’s becoming clearer that if I can finish all the games, I’ll be okay, however, I have heard about later PT’s in which I’m going to have to deal with some “dinos” and “mulch”.

RC -6
I’ve really been struggling on this section lately. Been going -5/-7 when it should be -3/-4. .
#5 - Okay, judging how they put their artwork in hard to get to/see areas, I can see E may not be in agreement with the author. But C? WTF? Whatever.
#6 #7 #9- I got destroyed by this passage. I absolutely hate missing main point passages. I was a victim to the shell game on #6, and misunderstood information in the last paragraph that led to the wrong answer for #7. On #9, another misunderstanding of the last paragraph (line 53 to be exact about the authority) which is why I picked D over A.
#13, #14 - Two missed main points in one section? They threw it in the last paragraph. I thought the main point encompassed more. The answer to #14 is in lines 20-22, but I still don’t see why A would be wrong based on lines 48-49.

#5 - Here’s another example of not reading the answer choices clear enough. I see why B is correct, yet I picked E, which if true, would mean A would also be true. Another Q I should not have missed.

#6 - These back-to-back missed really PO me. I would rather have a miss at #5 and twenty something rather than back-to-back. Makes me start to wonder what the heck I’m reading? Anyway, on this one, I ruled A out because nowhere did it say anything about labor costs, or at least that’s how I didn’t pick up on the “economically attractive” part. I got pulled into C because I missed the link.

#16 You have got to be kidding me. I just tanked on a very easy question. Nothing difficult about this. Both #5 and this one will bother me for a long while….

#19 - I’m having a hard time with this one. The “newness” of sleeping at the institute wore off after just two weeks? I get that the new drug didn’t work, just didn’t follow the newness thing. I went with E. Not seeing it.

#23 - Here’s another fun one Weaken Except. I can get after going through the board explanations why D is right, but picking this wording out on the real thing appears to be beyond my reasoning capabilities.

#26 - Another misread. At this point, I was ready to be done because #25 took forever to figure out the wording in B.

After reviewing this test, I’m not so optimistic as before. Too many easy mistakes made and I’m still struggling on some crafty worded Q’s. LG has me very concerned. Throw in a monster LG or 2 and I can no longer depend on at least one good section. All I want is a raw of 160/with at least 80CRs, anything above that is gravy. LR has stabilized for me to around -10, and RC has been anywhere from -5 to -7, which leaves about a -3 to -5 wiggle room for games.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:47 am

Today I journeyed through PT47 (doing 3 PTs in 3 days because I won’t be able to do any LSAT related stuff Monday or Tuesday next week). Anyway, got the same raw score as PT48 (85 correct), but on this test is was good for a 166. Breakdown was -3LR -4RC -6LR and -2LG. The LR scores continue to be consistent within the -8 to -11 total range, no matter whether there is an “easy” LR section I do better on or not. Always seems to even out in the end. This RC seemed tougher to me than PT48 but I missed less. I’m really starting to lose confidence on the RC as the answer choices are getting harder for me to decipher on the more recent tests. LG was great except for a boneheaded mistake in the last game.

LR1 -3
#21 I understood this was applying the part/whole kind of PR question. I looked at the Auto company in C being the “whole” and the “passenger cars” and “racing cars” being the parts, but it doesn’t work. Ruled B out too quickly because I got confused by the ordering.

#22 From what I am gathering, this is the most difficult LR question from this test given the discussions about it. During the test I was looking for an answer that would weaken the idea that the practice greatly increased the risk US consumers. I did not get the idea in C, but I guess the idea is that if “everybody’s doing it” whether the US does it or not will not have a strong threat on the US consumer health. Again, this is one of those questions I can figure out after review and going for assistance, but identifying it during the test seems beyond my capability. And from what I can tell, I’m not alone in regards to this question.

#25. Bah, had D&E. E clearly is agreement from both of them. I could not shake off D though because I assumed Thelma’s word “glut” = “increase” and the future verb tense “will lead”, combined with Claude’s “high number” and future verb tense “will be” as signaling both of them agreed of increasing numbers of middle-aged workers in the upcoming period.

RC -4

#5 - I had the right answer and changed it. Yeah, they were able keep their moderate stances, but in E, I got lured into assuming the civil rights activities was exclusively regarding protest/activism and not apart of the regular social ills the ministers were aiming to help correct via established channels.

#10 - Torn between A&B and went with B because of lack of understanding of “spurred”. I know it means help, but I guess I looked in the wrong spot (lines 15-18 clears this up).

#17 - I fell for an exaggeration answer E based on lines (33-39) about documentation, but E is more like a shell game response as well. C had tricky wording for me because I missed the “other parties” significance, with regards to judicial precedent advantage in court adjudication for the last sentence in the second paragraph.
#24 - God I hate these kind of questions. Like LG, I tried to underline the same parts that were all the same so I wouldn’t have to review them all. I went with D over A. Two problems with this answer. I missed the “mention of the implication” which I think is the last sentence of the first paragraph which D doesn’t have, and there is no presentation of an implication (it was an explanation). Now I can figure this out sitting back after the test, but during it, I’m not sure how to approach this convoluted language.

LR 2 -6

#8 - Fell for another exaggeration answer in D. Figures since this appears to be another alternate cause Q where it’s not the car one drives it’s the commonality of the vehicle in the country leading to the likelihood of theft

#19 - Had it down to B/C, went wrong. I can see what C is right, I just forgot the first sentence of the stimulus and over thought.

#20 - Yeah, the author defined “unnatural”, but like many others I went with “D” thinking that the impossibility of performing an unnatural action by definition would be contradictory, which a lot of other people have also made the same reasoning mistake based on board discussion of this Q.

#21 - 3 in a row? Uh, oh, must have fallen asleep. I didn’t diagram the conclusion correctly and it led to the wrong answer. I tend to panic on these formal logic questions because of the amount of time they consume.

#23 - Well the last part of this section surely isn’t going well. Apparently others also struggled with this one, so I’m in the same company. From what I get, A says in normal English that “just because scientific understanding is still advancing doesn’t mean that the TV superstition programs do not have an impeding effect on it”. Maybe if the programs weren’t around at all, scientific understanding would have advanced much quicker than the “steadily” rate. Again, trying to interpret this during an actual test is incredibly difficult. Honestly, I don’t know how you guys manage to consistently get through the abstract stuff.

#24 - 5 of the last 6?? Had it down to A/E. Both deal with alternate causes which is my weakness. A is talking about other cities though, so I’m assuming it isn’t relevant.

Talk about a rough stretch of questions! I hate when my misses are bunched up.

LG -2
I actually finished with about 10 minutes to spare, the first time that’s ever happened. I thought I aced it, but mis-interpreted a rule in the last game that cost me 2 points on #20/#22. I had S has not being able to work on M because of the ~S>P1 implication, but this doesn’t rule out the fact that S and P can both work on M which I failed to see, and as a result when I saw the answers for S working on Monday on #20 and #22 chose it/ruled it out and moved on. Of course, in #20, KP on Friday isn’t possible because of the last rule and would violate ~S>P1. And as mentioned for #22 it is possible to have SP, PO, NO, NS, JK without violating any rules.

Anyway, tomorrow is PT46. Hopefully I’ll continue with the same consistency or improve.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:55 pm

Wow, instead of doing PT 46 today, I found a copy of PT54 in the my documents folder of my desktop. This is the LSAT test I took back in June 2008 and scored a meager 149. At the time, I was so pissed and didn’t want anything to do with the test anymore that I didn’t think I had saved a copy of it within the six month timeframe, but apparently I did. The June 2008 Breakdown for me was -9RC -12LR -10LR -12LG!

Yikes, yeah you can lampoon me for not canceling or anything like that. I did not have the mindset or understand the capacity of what studying for this test really entailed and was “hoping” for an okay result. The fact it’s still been two years leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth. If it hadn’t been for coming to the board and getting riled up about failing this thing when I was watching all the board people get excited about the June ‘10 release date, I’m not sure I would have given this thing another go. But two months later of hard practice, I was most interested to see if I have any leg to stand on in improvement or not.

This is the last PT test I’ll be taking until Thursday. The results of this were: -1RC -4LR -7LR -0LG. The LR stayed consistent in the miss columns for me while their was major improvement in the RC. Now true, you can say I’ve seen this test before, but honestly I have not looked at this for over two years (not since the release date in 08). My LRB and LGB are all dated copies prior to this test. But it was interesting to compare my 2008 responses with the ones I picked today. Anyway, here’s the breakdown explanation:

LG -0
All four games rather simple completed well within the time limit. So what the hell happened in 2008? Well for starters, I didn’t really prep for in/out games and never determined the whole J or L had to be in which meant G was always in thing. That came naturally today. So I did not fall victim to #2 and #5 this time. I vaguely remember doing the 2nd game last in 2008 because of my problems with the last two games and falling into time pressure so I missed #10 and #11, but today I had both the right hypo up and the rules affixed to quickly get these right. For game three, I was thrown off by the vertical setup and did not have a good grasp of the rules or diagramming and fell victim to #14, #15, and #16. Of these today, only #15 provided me with just a little trouble but not after quickly associating the ~RS or ~SR implications for V‘s placement assuming S wasn‘t first. The last game in 2008 was a disaster because I diagrammed backwards and got confused by my “highest” and “lowest” directions. I missed 5 of 6 for what should have been a very easy linear game in #18, #19, #20, #22, and #23. Out of all those, only #22 requires some lengthy work, but not a whole lot. Overall, an easy LG section that I regret not originally being prepared for. This could have secured me at least a 155 had I just prepared better on games. Oh well, can only look forward from here.

RC -1
I was only one question away from having my first perfect RC. SOB, #27 got me, and interestingly it also got me in June 2008. Then I picked C and today I chose A. Don’t ask me why I picked C as that made absolutely no sense, I didn’t understand the last passage in 2008. I chose between A/B today and went wrong. Looks like A is too extreme.In 2008, I missed #21, #22, and #25 because I missed the groupthink connection and implications of the last two paragraphs and was in time pressure. That was not a problem today and the question/answers seemed straightforward. On the cakewalk, in 2008 I missed #14, #17, and #19. No problem with it today, except I almost fell again for D on 19 but there was too much info of attributes in the passage that A had to be right. The comparative reading passage was easy. In 2008, I missed only #9, but today I got the whole human eat food in 1st paragraph and harmfulness in the second paragraph. Finally, in 2008, I missed #5 when I chose D which is just plain stupid. Luckily today, I got E without problems. Coupled with LG, this is like 20 questions I could have gotten and made it to 160.

LR1 -4
#13 - Damn question got me again. Both in 2008 and today, said D. Today, I had B and changed it back to D. After reviewing this I think I misinterpreted the type of answer to look for. I was going for a strengthener, when the question stem is asking for an assumption.
#23 - Another one that also got me in 2008. I had C, then changed it to D. Chose B back in 2008. The order and trying to diagram these was a pain. What pushed me away from C was it didn’t have only in the answer choice. I hate these questions. The stimulus seems easy to follow, but matching it to one of the 5 when they all look the same is a pain.
#24 - The infamous cow-farts question! Also got me in 2008 when I also said E. A doesn’t stand out because it doesn’t seem to show how to keep methane in check. It meets a side goal of the farmers, but how does this strengthen the argument in keeping methane in check?
#25 - Like in 2008, fell for C. Another question that demands diagramming. I guess someone could derive pleasure and be fearful of the same dangerous action taken, which would still be courageous.

So all 4 questions were ones that also got me in 2008. This time, I did not fall to #5, #14, #15, #17, #18, #20, #22, #26. Of these, only #17 gave me a little confusion. The rest didn’t seem all that bad and looking at some of my 2008 answers, I’m left wondering what I was thinking.

LR2 -7
#13 - Just like 2008, chose B over A. A’s wording sucks for a paradox question. I guess if you rule B out your left with it cause the others don’t talk about erosion.
#14 - Got it right in 08, most likely a fluke. Today, I chose C because…I most likely didn’t understand the question lol. When I go back and diagram the first and second sentence, D makes sense, but I don’t believe my eye is keen enough to catch it in testing conditions.
#15 - Just like 2008, I picked A over B. What happened here is when I reviewed the stimulus, I need to remember to keep track of the conclusion which underlies the motivation. Honestly, I should have caught this one. Maybe next time.
#19 - And just like 2008, I picked D over B. Seems like an easy question. B seemed too easy. I went fishing for an alternate cause. Doesn’t work here. If it is due to training, and the guy just won the Tour de France, then they should have at least one of these attributes, which would strengthen, not weaken the argument.
#21 - The famous witnesses one. Like most people who miss this, I put E. Damn, these PT54 paradox questions suck. It’s not the wording you’d come to expect.
#22 - This is the one of three questions I missed today that I did not miss in 2008. I got stuck between B/C and went wrong. Has to be B because the execution part is part of the conclusion and so it should be in the correct answer choice. Duh.
#23- This is the other one I didn’t miss in 2008, that I missed today. That was probably a fluke in 2008. Anyway, got stuck on B/E, chose wrong, having issues with diagramming formal logic when I need to.

The other misses that I had in 2008 that I avoided today: #1 easy, #3 easy, #10 easy, #11 a little tough between C/E, but went with C because it was more complete of the second sentence, #16 easy, #20 somewhat difficult to pick out A, but not as bad as the witnesses one)

So there you have it. Although I should be grateful my LR average has held up -9/-11, I’m still disappointed overall. This LR seemed loaded with a lot more formal logic and difficult paradox Q’s than the prior PT’s I’ve done, or maybe it’s my imagination. Games continues to be a positive side, but I’m still scared stiff they will hand me a dino-mulch problem. RC was a big plus today, but I never take it for granted, because -1 there easily becomes -5 the next PT and, etc. But I am glad that I’m at least somewhat certain this time I’ll be able to score higher than a 149.

Back to vacation time for the next couple of days. Probably will do PT46 Thursday.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Thu Sep 02, 2010 12:56 pm

Back to the test mode today. The target this morning was PT46. Overall, I thought this test wasn’t too bad at all and was slightly better than my normal average. On this one, I got 167, going -4RC, -4LR, -4LR, -0LG.

LG -0
People were right that these games in the 40’s are considerable easier than the pre-40’s. I had to check the clock to make sure I didn’t mess up when I started the timer. I started at 6:17am and was done with the last game by 6:42. It’s amazing how wildly these sections can go depending on if they decide to throw a wrench with a tough game or not. Game 1 has few possibilities with the F>L>M>H rule. Game 2 kept testing the R and no F on the next immediate tape rule. Game 3 also has few setup options once you get N has to be 2, it basically plays around with the placement of O,J, and L with L,O always being R only. Game 4 wasn’t difficult once you figured M or P has to be in all 3 and because there are nine slots, there has to be a couple serving on more than one subcommittee.

LR1 -4
#18 - I had it down to TCR and E, went wrong. The correct response makes sense, but I’m still having a hard time interpreting these PR questions. They’ve gotten substantially difficult for me.
#19 - I had it down to TCR and A, went wrong. B is clearly a strengthener because it removed any charges of bias from the results by being exposed to the culture that favored octaves. I had a hard time ruling out A however, but I guess it wouldn’t strengthen since you’d expect children and adults to respond the way they did by responding to the culture.
#21 - These principle questions towards the end always get me. This one reminded me of a Q from a test in the 30’s I also missed about justified or legally disobeying a rule or something of that nature. In fact, the last two answers I completed (this one and #23, I skipped and did at the end, but still got them wrong).
#23 - Like a lot of other people, I missed the word “by”. I had K>>LS LA>H, K>>H, but because I missed the word “by” got confused about what I was looking for. Sucks. I got suckered into A with LS>LA.

LR2 -4
#15 - Wow, I bombed this one, totally missed the argument and got caught up in the literature stuff. B clearly makes sense, especially if its negated.
#18 - Here is one I had trouble discerning between the sentence being a premise and an intermediate conclusion. I understand the sentence supports the main conclusion of the argument (last sentence). If I throw a “Therefore” in front of this second sentence and use the first sentence as a premise to this, my thinking was why could this not be an intermediate conclusion? Help here would be appreciated.
#19 - Still missing these little shifts. Like I failed to see the shift between “everyone” and “none of Tanya’s friends”. In this sense, I can see why E makes sense.
#22 - Apparently the most difficult LR question from the test given the amount of discussion on. It eliminates an alternate cause. These type of correct answers don’t jump out at me when I take the test and I’m not sure if they ever will. True, if the under 18 population increased, it rules out an alternate cause for the rise in average age (decrease in the under 18, although same # of old people in the region would weaken the “dramatic rise” in number of old people living in the region.) Since under 18 are at the lower end of the age group and increased, you need something at the higher ends of the age group to offset it, plus enough to push the average age from 52 to 57. Okay, I get this reasoning, but in terms of pointing it out in a timed test, forget about it.

RC -4 (F the last passage!)
#10 - Yeah, I reversed them in D. I assumed that the analogy was the stone-bread thing in the second point. Too bad I didn’t look back at line 44 where the word “example” was used. Grrr.
#24 - What is the last part of the correct answer saying “cause less harm than it would prevent”. I did not understand this question.
#25 - Probably because it looks like #24 and #25 are related, I missed this one. I went off of information in the first paragraph with D
#26 - Fell for B than E. Both seem to prevent harm, maybe E more-so because the pilots are conforming to keep from crashing into one another and killing each other. But pharmacists by conforming prevent harm of giving unauthorized medicine to people without a prescription who can die in some cases if they take it.

Well except for the last RC passage, everything seemed good up until then.

Anyway, tomorrow is PT45, then I will probably do one more PT44 before I go back to the base on Monday. September is going to be a hectic working month for me and I think I’m going to do some switching around so I can make sure I get 55-60 in before taking the test.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Sat Sep 04, 2010 12:30 am

Today’s task was PT 45. Started off brutal in the first LR, but was able to recover from the other three sections. Once again, no matter how easy or difficult one of the LR’s section have been, I’ve always managed to miss the average of 10 +/- 1 or 2. It just frustrates me when I get a breakout of LR sections where one gets bombed and the other is okay.

Results were: LR1 -7 (GRR!) RC -4 LG-1 LR2 -3 for a 84/99 167

LG -1
#8 - Doh! I drew my two hypo’s based on the placement of S in 1-3 and 2-4. Unfortunately, looking at the first hypo, forgot T couldn’t be 1 or 3. Now that I’m finishing in time, I need to utilize the remaining time to check my work. The last two games took a little longer than normal, but I got through unscathed, which I’m glad I handled the conditional rules properly. Now if I could just do that for LR questions, everything would be great.

LR2 -3
#4 - Dumb miss. Had A/D, went wrong. I don’t think I read the stimulus very carefully on this one and was trying to race. Of course if someone hooks up the damn thing for the customer, it removes responsibility of the customer from breaking something.
#18 - Had this one down to A/D and went wrong. I had a hard time trying to eliminate D on the basis of the last sentence. Had to go searching online to find out what was up and discovered the issue was with the word “usually” and “partially” which together make it appear most large companies are decentralized. That’s not how I read this choice in mind when I took the test and not sure if I would convert that thought in test mode. Makes sense, but only after the fact.
#20 - Strange, this one was also down to A/D and went wrong. Been batting 0 recently on the latter PR questions. I’ve read the LRB, but the patterns I’m encountering I don’t see where the PR chapter is helping me. In the earlier PT’s, these Qs didn’t seem so complex, now they are getting out of control.
(oh, and thanks to the person who gave me the coronary on #13. Thank goodness for search engines)

RC -4
#3, Um, not really sure why I picked B here, as there’s nothing in the passage to support donors being more responsive. D makes total sense. Shame on me
#8 - I hate this question. I picked C, because when I’m looking at “modified as a response” I’m interpreting this in regards to the author’s suggestion the code be revised. Yes, he defends it, I just thought the passage ended with how to defend it.
#10 - Had it down to A/E, chose wrong. I had a very difficult time eliminating E and apparently is more BS wording of “certain principles” that makes this choice wrong.
#22 - Had it down to C/D, chose wrong. Did I see “classification” instead of “clarification”? I was in the wrong spot, needed to look at lines 29-31 while I was back at the top of the passage.

LR1 -7 (ouch!)
#12 - The infamous dioxin question. I had D, at the time ruled C out because this was talking about fish immediately downstream from the mill. I sort of see it, but only after the fact. I do understand why my answer is wrong and the other wrong choices are wrong, but TCR is not something that jumps out.
#18 - Hmm, two brutally difficult weaken Qs. Thought I had gotten an alternate cause with modifying them for religious ceremonies, but apparently not. Another one where TCR does not jump out at me.
#19 - Got stuck between A/D, went wrong. I assumed in D the compromise would have been more restrictive with giving into some of the environmentalist demands, but apparently you can’t make that assumption here.
#20 - D makes sense after I reviewed this one. I went with E. This whole damn 6th page of the first LR was incredibly loaded with difficult Qs for me.
#21 - Had the right answer with A, then second-guessed myself that “all” was too extreme and changed it to B. 0 for 4 on this page
#24 - If anybody talked to me like answer choice B reads, I swear I would kick their ass. BS artistry in abstractiveness at its very finest. In seriousness, it makes sense after the fact. I got lured into the first part of C and my own misinterpretation of the stimulus.
#25 - Bombed another PR question because I missed the quantity comparison. What throws me off here is I’m never sure if the answers are going to be presented in the same quantity order. Time to go back to the LRB chapter. There’s just too many misses on these Qs and too many points being given away.

So kept on average, but I hate it when one LR section gets “loaded” and the other is relatively light. Missing 6 of the last 9 is inexcusable, even if they are difficult.
I have one more PT I’m going to take tomorrow, PT44 before leaving to go back to DE to work on Monday. After work on Tuesday, I’m going to spend time reading the LRB PR and Abstract chapters again The rest of the week is going to be more hectic because I have to travel to NJ for work, and then there’s weekend drill, so probably no more PT’s until the 13th.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Fri Sep 10, 2010 8:16 pm

It was a very light week for me this week, taking only one PT (SuperPrep C). At this juncture after doing about 38 PT’s, I’m planning on doing PT 55-60 timed sometime between now and test day, while using some of the sections from the tests I haven’t taken timed in the early 40’s as practice. I’ve taken so many of these things now and have pretty much scored around the same, and have limited time due to fiscal year close-out that I’m not going to risk burnout so shortly before the test. I’m pretty damn confident that I’ll surpass my horrendous 149 from June 2008 on PT54 and confident that I’ll break 160 (provided PT61 doesn’t have some Stalin-like curve of 80 for a 160.

Also, not sure what’s going around this week, but I got sick on Sunday in Florida and when I went back to work in Delaware, everybody was sick here too. My eyes were too sore to even look at anything Wednesday night, so I basically had six days off between doing PT’s 45 and SuperPrep C. I still feel like garbage, but at least whatever is going around now will hopefully be out of the system by 9 Oct.

Oh, and another thing about horrible places to try and practice the LSAT: On an airplane where the turbulence is just a tad bit “bumpy”. For someone who doesn’t like to fly anyway, trying to work LSAT problems while having the bottom floor fall under you and see your life flash before your eyes makes for some pretty intense moments. That, along with sitting in the very front row, where someone has decided to No. 2 in the lavatory that leaves a horrendous odor every time the door swings open, I doubt any test conditions will exceed these two variables.

Anyway, on to the results of SuperPrep C. To my happiness, a managed a 172 thanks to a very generous curve. The LG’s, while time consuming were very manageable, while both LR sections appeared substantially easier than other LR sections (especially the PR questions which I’ve been struggling on). Anyway, the results were -1LG, -4LR, -2LR, -5RC. Here’s how it all went down:

LG -1 (#14)
Seriously, I thought the games from A&B were way harder, but the things I was reading on the board led me to believe that C was insanely difficult. How so?

In the first game, I had the set-up
BR: L,Q| R,?|S,?|?,?|
RE: K,L| R,?|S,?|?,?|
1 2 3 4

Nothing really difficult about the Q’s here. They pretty much play around with R/S limitations along with the no two-same team-mates on both teams thing.

The second game has two chains of R>P>L and T>M>V, then plays around with the whole If S>P, M>S>P and If M>S, M>S>P. I lost some time on here because my mind started wandering out, but again nothing too difficult.

The third game is where I made my one stupid mistake. I initially missed the first rule that the 2 parks has a G and picked wrong on 13, but figured it out in time to correct it after hitting a wall on #15 and realizing I missed the rule. Unfortunately, I didn’t double check #14 and missed a very easy question. The initial set-up is pretty straight-forward:
MP have to be in J and TG have to be in H.

The last game which everyone seems to believe is the most challenging seems to be one of those games LSAT makes you think is difficult, but really isn’t. Diagramming wise, I drew the whole 3 year by 5 factory grid, but really didn’t need it. For Q20 and Q21, you can get them quickly by quickly eliminating based on the rules. Seeing that only Z can follow X and since there’s only one Z in each year, there can only be one X in Y1 and Y2, quickly yields the answer to Q22. Again, getting the X-Z inference based on the rules also quickly yields the answer to Q23. Finally, for Q24 (the toughest of the bunch for this game) you can quickly strike out C, D, and E for the easy to spot rule violations of X/V, and Z/X in F, while it takes a few seconds longer to possibly eliminate B, since it’s the G car that violates the X/W rule. Still nothing too bad, and not really too much to diagram as a main setup here. I’ll take these games anytime (minus the careless mistake).

LR -4
#4 - You’ve got to be kidding me. I just got fooled by the ole switcheroo game because the wording made me think C had both groups with LOW blood sugar and failed the see the change with the word NORMAL. Those LSAT pranksters. These misses will drive me crazy. It’s giving away points.
#17 - I chose C. Wow, going back I missed the connection of the two questions and didn’t realize they were similar with exception to the additional suggestion in the first question. Bad on me.
#19 - Sheesh, another bad miss. A definitely strengthens the argument. For being a somewhat easy LR section, I sure am doing what I can to give points back.
#22 - Finally, a question I don’t feel too bad about missing! Looks like the most difficult LR of the entire test. I have been running rings around trying to figure this one out.
I had this diagrammed as Sentence 1: Home----~House and the Conclusion House-----~Home. I don’t know if that is right, other than the conclusion appears to be the contra positive of the first sentence? I really am stumped on this one.

LR -2
#9 - I got stuck between B/D, went wrong because my lack of knowledge of the precise definition of the word “indifferent” failed to lead me to the understand of the first explanation sentence in Superprep, that you can’t consider something a top priority and be indifferent by mere definition, which I get after the fact.
#23 - Why did I chose the more extreme answer with C? I don’t believe I read the answer choices clear enough. B makes a lot of sense. I know I botched this question, not sure why its rated a Cat 5. I know C is extreme and A plays switcheroo with “authors” and “political leaders”.

Overall, disappointed I didn’t do better on LR at -6, even if my average is -10 because these questions were not that bad, although there were a high amount of “EXCEPT” questions on LR2. I took more time on these, but managed to get through them all without too much trouble.

RC -5
#3, Got stuck with C/D, went wrong. I thought D was too restrictive, but C isn’t restrictive enough and doesn’t jive with the chickadee information. Sucks.
#8 - Grr, hate missing main point questions. I actually had the right answer E, then changed it to B after seeing the topic of the later questions regarding research and thought I was missing something.
#17 - I mixed up my timeline. Had A, then changed to D, but D was mentioned.
#20 - I chose C because I missed the diversion from local government to “highest levels of government”
#26 - This one really confused me, because I initially wanted to put C, but the passage had the 200 million year reference. I went with D since it didn’t mention what types of carnivores left the marks? Either way, I missed the specific reference to taphonic investigation.

When it comes to RC, I really need to focus on reading these questions clearer.

Anyway that was the SuperPrep C experience. Next up is some sectional work in the early 40’s, and then next week, I will tackle PT 55, on my way to PT60. Hopefully, all this work for the past 3 months will not be in vain.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:49 pm

A little unorthodox in how I’m doing the order in taking my last PT’s. Spent last week working individual sections in the lower PT’s (39-44) and had mixed results. Particularly, I got beat up by PT44’s LR sections pretty bad, but still managed a 162, and if this is the low point, I’ll take it.

Anyway, I went ahead and purchased the last of the PT’s I plan to do last night. Took PT60 last night, and will probably do PT55 on Thursday. Goal is to get 55-60, and if there’s time, do PT51 as well. I’ve been slowing up significantly during September to avoid burnout . In between the lapse in taking PT’s, I want to spend even more time going over my tests and reviewing information in the Bibles so it sticks.

Anyway, my PT results for 60 was 84/99 for 167. LR was average for me -4 and -5, while the I got humiliated by the mulch game and went -3 on LG, but got buoyed by an RC section that while easy, appeared to be incredibly time consuming in dealing with the questions, but managed to miss only 3. To the analysis:

LG (-3)
The Interns game type and Craft Game were awesome! I really have learned to enjoy this setup because I’ve gotten good at reading the rules and making the necessary inferences as I’m writing them down. It will be awesome if PT61 has setups like these. Game 2 was also very easy for me and I will not be feared by these conditional/sequential linear type set-ups. Like Spongebob Squarepants, I’m ready.

However, the mulch and stones game has me scratching my head. Not that it was difficult, but more that I totally botched 3 of the questions and never noticed it.

#13 - There are games of this kind I can’t remember, but my failure here was that in writing the rules I didn’t first recognize that M has to at least double up in order to be in line with the 3-clean up maximum. Of course, I managed to manually work this out in #14 and only glanced back at #13 to see my D choice was in line with 5/6 doubled up. But I missed that M being in 3 violated the second rule, and thus I got sunk on this Q.

#16 - Uh oh, I was running a little behind on time and tried to speed up. Only diagrammed one hypo: SSMMMSS. Did not double check with the second hypo: SSSMMMS and got suckered into B.

#17 - Double uh-oh. I had an enormous problem trying to decipher what this Q was asking. When I finally figured this out, I chose the wrong hypo MSSMMSS, then wasted more time drawing the impossibility of SMSSMMS, lost my composure, and never recovered to get MMSSMSS. Grr!

Wow, is all I can say about this game. Nothing super difficult with it. It should have been done quickly. I will rework this one religiously between now and test day.

RC (-3)
These passages and questions were excessively long. And what’s up with the comparative reading passage having only 5 questions?
#3 Had it down to D/E, chose wrong off of information I misinterpreted from lines 50-55.

#14 - Went with C. Apparently, I think the word “develop” here is what puts it out. I can see why E is correct.

#27 - I had literally no time left for this Q and went with A and called it the day. Yeah, looks like B weakens it based on info from lines 30-35. Still I’ll take a -3 on RC any day.

LR1 (-4)
#9 - Okay, when I looked at D, my first thought was “no, that’s too simple, I must be being suckered into something I’m not accounting for in the paradox. But apparently, I over thought the question. I should not have missed this question.

#13 - I didn’t see anything wrong with B when I picked it, but I can see how C definitely weakens it by bringing other financial considerations into the picture other than salary. In hindsight, looks like B compares high salary to low salary and not salaries to some other job factor (time off, flex hours, etc). These little intricacies are so hard to spot in test mode sometimes. I often wonder how people pull it off.

#21 - I skipped this question and finished it last in the section. Went with D. When I go back and diagram (which I panic in the real test conditions, I get AàBmostCàD and A most D for the flawed reasoning, which choice B does match). However, I worry in test conditions about wasting too much time trying to diagram one question. I know how to do it, but not how to do it quickly enough without panicking.

#23 - I guess E makes sense when you negate it, although I would have never thought of that since I read it as a principle question and not an assumption. But if E isn’t true, than the strong libel laws wouldn’t have the effect the stimulus says they do.

LR2 (-5)
#11 - Ah, ye old alternate cause elimination answer. I’m amazed how consistent I am at missing these. I went with E, assuming that if the 2 centuries old plants weren’t destroyed before, and yet were more vulnerable, then the conclusion followed. Something’s erroneous in my reasoning because D clearly rules out that something else contributed to doing in the coral. I did not see this when I approached the question, however.

#17 - Bad miss on my part. I chose A. Why? I don’t know, probably because by the time I read the stimulus I must have forgotten the first sentence.

#20 - I went with D, but now that I look at the question again it appears I didn’t focus on the application part. A does make sense.

#22- Got stuck between A/C, chose wrong. I didn’t isolate the conclusion of the first sentence in the stimulus. Hmm, whenever the conclusion comes earlier than the last sentence, I tend to sometimes forget, that assumption question answer choices have to reflect the new information of the conclusion.

#24 - Got suckered into D, when it should have been B because B is what the stimulus addresses. Wow, I really sucked on this PT’s Principle questions. Will have to go back and work some more on this.

So that was this exam. At least I can still feel confident that my improvement from the 140’s is consistent. However, I was disappointed overall on this test, as I feel I could have done better on LR, and definitely should have on LG. While a 170 on the real thing for me is probably a pipe dream, it’s still nice to dream.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Fri Sep 24, 2010 6:41 pm

Okay, well I was behind on updating my diary. After figuring out the base library lets us print as much as we want for free as long as we bring our own paper, I was able to print out 59&58 and do them the right way (for some stupid reason, lodging doesn’t have computers in the business center capable of reading .PDF files).

Anyway, this blog post is about PT58, which for me is one of the few (and probably only times) I’ll ever see 170 in a timed situation. Everything flowed so well with this test. (-3LR, -4RC, -0LG, -4LR). Missing only -7 total in LR was a big accomplishment for me and I managed to pick off some of the hard Q’s of the sections to which I was quite proud. I probably could have gotten even more right, and hopefully with this review, I will continue good fortune on PT57 tomorrow.

LR1 (#17, #22, #25)
I almost fell for the trap at #5 at C, but I picked up that shell, gave it the finger and chose A. Avoided another C trap answer at #8 and pretty much was on cruise control to #17.

#17 - Got stuck between A&B. “Adjacent Areas” and the shift from satisfaction to values is probably what does A in. I definitely see B could, but I used some type of faulty reasoning where I couldn’t eliminate A.

#22 - I got #21, though it took some time and was starting to get worried about the final stretch of questions because the sectioned seemed so manageable. I chose A, but that really does not make sense. I’ve gotten better on my assumption questions by working on filling in the missing link, but still forget to do this time to time. It also cost me in #25.

BTW, I got #24 right, but I think I used faulty reasoning leading to E, because I didn’t notice the scope shift of the valley-preserve. My thinking was maybe the preserve doubled 7 years ago and stayed the same which is not what the conclusion was about. Kind of strange because this seems to be a common error of reasoning a lot of test takers would make, and yet it in this case, it could still get the person to the correct answer.

#25 - I didn’t diagram this very well and went with C. I’ve read the explanation for this and it looks like a bear.

RC (#3, #15, #20, #21) - Much, much, easier than PT59!
#3 - Yes, I know the information was there at the end. I focused on “reconstruction” and the information in lines 47-49 and chose B.
#15 - WTF? Total Whiff on lines, 5-7. It says “claim” and I focused on the “premises”. You gotta be kidding me.
#20 - This is probably the most difficult question of the section because at first glance D seems what the author was arguing against. I nearly chose it and talked myself out of it, but the other choices aren’t better. I chose A, but there really is no support for that, it’s just B, C, and E could be easily ruled out.
#21 - Another whiff! Got answer choices A/E confused, thought B did continuous sound (did the questions out of order on this so it wasn’t the first Q I approached)
LG (-0)
Game 1 is a cakewalk. Game 2 wasn’t bad, except for #12. I took 4 minutes to answer this question alone and got it by eliminating the other answer choices with hypos, but it wasn’t necessary. If you clearly diagrammed rules #1 & #4 and their contra positives, you’ll see Rochelle’s presence or absence will force one of L or M to be in or out. This really reminded me of the Fruit Stand Game (can’t remember the question). Game 3 was super easy. Game 4 #23, was a little tough, but not bad. All in all, very good section.

LR #4 (#3, #9, #17, #22)
#3 - I had a hard time using conclusion/identification to distinguish between A/D and went wrong. Looking back now, doesn’t seem so hard to throw a “because” in place of “thus” and a “therefore” in the first sentence. Actually, looking at it now, there’s no way the first sentence is a sub-conclusion. Darn.

#9 - Wow, there are a lot of MBT/Strongly support questions on this PT. I was doing good at them, up to here, but I failed to follow the rule that “if it’s not in the stimulus, it’s not correct”. Like most who miss this question, I got suckered into B. I didn’t know whether “proportion” implied “susceptibility” but A is clearly supported.

#17 - Damn, another whiff. I don’t understand why on some assumption questions I still fail to follow the basic procedure of linking the elements. I went fishing for an alternate cause elimination in A. Not that that still makes any sense. I can see why D is right by linkage. Still have work to do on this. These LR misses could have been avoided.

#22- Super Damn! The subtlety of these PR questions continue to amaze me. I thought A flowed with the stimulus well, but after review I now realize it’s got the sufficient/necessary conditions reversed from the stimulus thanks to the “only if”. I have to admit in time pressure, I picked A because I couldn’t quickly tell the difference between it and C, but was able to rule out B, D, and E.

Looking back on my question misses from this test makes me wonder what might have been. For the first time, I feel I could have gotten these questions and feel like I know where to go with working on not missing Q’s like these again. I still think 170 for me is a pipe dream and like I said before all this studying started, 160 is the goal. But as I continue to analyze my tests and maintain some level of proficiency, I do get a little bit more excited about the possibilities. Just a little bit.

PT59’s explanation to come later. I’m still PO’ed at Noguchi and trying to figure out what the hell went wrong.

User avatar

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Just Another LSAT Diary

Postby DrackedaryMaster » Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:03 pm

I think I’ve finally calmed down enough to talk about PT59 from Tuesday night. Let me say that if you are weak on RC, this may not be the best PT to save right before the test to do. On the other hand, if you rock RC, this might be the best test for you because if you go perfect on the Noguchi passage, I will be shocked if you don’t hit at least the mid 170’s.

For me though, this test sucked. I was on my way to a possible 170’s score when I was destroyed by the last two passages. Granted, I still made my typical score average of 166-167, but that came at the cost of missing a whopping 8 RC questions, all within the last two passages! To the real Dec 2009 takers, I feel your pain.

My breakdown was (-2LG, -5LR, -4LR, -8RC) 166 :--(. All I had to do was not collapse on RC and 170 would have been in my grasp, even with the 2 LG mistakes.)

LG (#13, #20)
First two games were easy.
#13 - SOB! I forgot the question. Literally. I wrote P, S9, G, was trying to figure out whether the last class had to be R/J and when I couldn’t figure out which one, figured it had to be W. What the Hell? Did I really not see the Question ask if she takes RUSSIAN?
Epic Reading Fail!

#20 - Saved this baby for last in the section. I tested the wrong number. We know D is out from #17, but stupid me failed to look at my work on #19 to see 2 was possible. I tested 1 and it worked. I then tested 5. Why didn’t I look at 2? It was already drawn on 19. FML

Two Q’s that should not have been missed!

LR1 (#7, #20, #21, #23, #25)
#7 - Got suckered into D. I get the explanation that he’s not refuting the argument that attending an event is richer, he’s undermining the explanation for it.

#20 - Like most people that miss this one, went wrong with B. This one is harder to grasp for me, though I definitely see why D weakens the argument. I almost chose it, but couldn’t rule out B at the time.

#21 - I know I have bad grammar sometimes, but C may be this biggest pile of crap wording I’ve seen. I had to read this like 3 times very slowly to figure out it’s saying that the animals that tended to be extinct were animals the humans hunted, while the majority of those that were not hunted survived (or something like that). I went with D thinking that immunity would be blanketed to all animals.

#23 - Flat out misread. The reason I missed this one was that I missed the “reversal of last year’s” part in the stimulus. I did not notice that the Hollyville disaster happened before the event mentioned in the first sentence. Because of this, I never considered D and went with C.
#25 - I originally picked B, then changed it to A before time expired. I missed the “less today” part which is why I think I changed it at the last moment. If there was more methane back then, maybe it, not carbon dioxide kept the oceans from freezing. Come to think of it. Why did I pick A? That eliminates an alternate cause? I’ve got to stop missing these!

LR2 (#15, #19, #20, #25)
#15 - Another PR whiff. Had it down to A/C, went wrong. The stimulus combined into one situation which choice A does not. I guess I thought C was missing something.

#19 - I thought this was the hardest question of the section for me. I see why E was right, but I had difficulty diagramming this during the test.

#20 - The peppered moth question. D makes a lot of sense. I think I was rushing on this last part.

#25 - When I read this question, I was like “Oh, the reviewers have biases” and jumped at A. But this is talking specifically about removing biases from the people who wrote the report, so even if the reviewer has his own biases, that won’t be a big deal, unless of course the reviewer has biases that match that of the preparer.

RC (pretty much everything after Q16, except 19, 24, and 25)
What the Hell. The first two passages are like open-air fist pumps! Then I met some guy name Noguchi.
#17 - lol, the metal question through me off. Then I go and miss what is arguably the easiest question of this passage in #17. Whiff
#18 - Um yeah, that inference is easy to make in D. Sure, whatever LSAC.
#20 - Okay, picking D was dumb, the passage doesn’t mention anything about that, but reflections only, not the likeness. I can see why E is true after the fact. Real time was harder to pick this up.
#21 - Went with E, apparently was B which is mentioned earlier in the text. Screw this.
#22 - WTF is the author’s position? That Noguchi was great innovator and pioneer in positive light statues? If so, I can see why A would be right. I didn’t realize today’s real LSAT would have 3 graded LR sections now, hmmm.
#23 - Stuck between A/B, went wrong. I hate this passage too.
#26 - This is bullshit. Yeah, C is what is referenced to the third paragraph, but since this is also the final paragraph of the passage, why would A not be used to tie a neat little bow?
#27 - I went with A because if prehistoric groups weren’t in small groups that the author argues was an important factor in how they make decisions now, wouldn’t that make the economists argument more valid?

You know what? Screw it. I had thought I recovered from this section emotionally but apparently not. It still pisses me off. LSAC needs to decide whether or not they want to do a reading comp section or another LR section under the auspices of the RC section. Now granted, when I go back I can get these answers, but deciphering through the choices and trying to make it in time on these substantially harder passages is virtually impossible.

Okay, tomorrow afternoon is PT57. Hopefully it will be more like the RC on PT58 and PT60.

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 17 guests