Is it possible to purcahse Prep test 62 from LSAC now?

[directpaper]

Would it be possible to purchase Prep test 62 from LSAC right now? The suspense is killing me.

[glitter178]

Would it be possible to purchase Prep test 62 from LSAC right now? The suspense is killing me.

no.

[directpaper]

I was just curious because it is available on the website, but I didnt checkout when I added it to my cart.

[spets]

According to the LSAC Store:

PrepTest 62 (Dec 2010 LSAT)
(includes comparative reading questions; available late January 2011)

[kkklick]

According to the LSAC Store:

PrepTest 62 (Dec 2010 LSAT)
(includes comparative reading questions; available late January 2011)

Why would they mention that they include the comparative reading questions?

Duh.

[ren2011]

They only started comparative passages a few years ago. So the older PTs don't have them- I guess they're just doing it to indicate which tests have it and which don't?

[kkklick]

Makes sense, I figured it would be obvious since they switched to comparative reading back in 2007 and it's more than become a staple in the RC section. Next they'll be saying, "Includes that hypo-ridden stained glass game that f**ked everyone up!"

[cardinals03]

Makes sense, I figured it would be obvious since they switched to comparative reading back in 2007 and it's more than become a staple in the RC section. Next they'll be saying, "Includes that hypo-ridden stained glass game that f**ked everyone up!"

+1 - they need to set a limit on time consuming hypo's at say....30

[ren2011]

Makes sense, I figured it would be obvious since they switched to comparative reading back in 2007 and it's more than become a staple in the RC section. Next they'll be saying, "Includes that hypo-ridden stained glass game that f**ked everyone up!"

x100000.
I imagine stained glass won't be so difficult once we all see it outside of the testing conditions. LG is my worst section, yet mulch, dinosaurs, etc. didn't seem so bad when I was doing the PTs myself.

[kkklick]

That's always the case, however I have come accross the odd RC passage/difficult game in practice where I thought to myself that if I got something like this on the test I'd be done for, timing wise. Usually though practice tests can only prepare you for so much, your bound to come accross something on the real thing that will trip you up but when you see it again after you're like what was I thinking.

[gdane]

Ill have to take a look at stained glass, but the other "killer" games that people complained about (dinosaurs and mulch) werent that difficult at all.

LSAC is trying to confuse test takers by making LG's too easy, so easy that people feel theres some kind of catch or hidden inference. This was what happened with mulch and one of the games on Oct 2010.

To answer the OP's question: You cant buy it now, but scan Cambridge LSAT in January and you can probably a PDF. Cambridge tends to have the tests before LSAC since LSAC sends you the cute booklet and all that.

[kkklick]

For October are you referring to runners? I found all the games in October to be pretty straightforward.

[gdane]

For October are you referring to runners? I found all the games in October to be pretty straightforward.

Artifacts. People in the waiting thread were freaking out about it. But, it was really basic. Really basic. Runners took me a while.

[spets]

I'm not particularly good at games, but I don't remember having any problems with the stained glass game (conferences was a whole another story). Now I'm really worried that I missed a rule or something and completely botched the game

[kkklick]

For October are you referring to runners? I found all the games in October to be pretty straightforward.

Artifacts. People in the waiting thread were freaking out about it. But, it was really basic. Really basic. Runners took me a while.

That's odd I finished artifacts in 3 and half minutes on the real thing, to me that was the easiest game in the section.

[kkklick]

I'm not particularly good at games, but I don't remember having any problems with the stained glass game (conferences was a whole another story). Now I'm really worried that I missed a rule or something and completely botched the game

Not necessarily, those who found glass windows difficult couldn't get through the questions with confidence, it's unlikely you felt you did well but missed something. Don't worry too much about it the stress will eat you alive.

[ren2011]

I'm not particularly good at games, but I don't remember having any problems with the stained glass game (conferences was a whole another story). Now I'm really worried that I missed a rule or something and completely botched the game

I'm sure you didn't. If you felt good about it, you're probably fine. It depends on your strengths- diagramming vs. hypos, and so on.

[tng11]

...

[spets]

Thanks guys for the encouragement. I haven't been stressing myself out too much (despite that this was my third and final attempt + I'm pretty sure the LR I did worst on was real and the one I thought I did the best on was experimental ). These past few days have been amazing as far as free time and doing whatever I feel like. I've just been so used to clicking on the TLS hotlink in my Firefox bar the past month that I find myself reading the forums even though there's no reason for me to be here.

I should probably start on my personal statement, haha.

[Miracle]

you can pre-order it! When it comes in, they ship it to you.

[kkklick]

I think doing PTs and the actual test is very different, especially for people on this board. When you talk about going to schools like HYSCCN, those 1 or 2 missed questions could make the difference between an acceptance or rejection. Naturally, on the real thing people stress out a lot more than PTs, and panic sets in once something that looks "odd" comes up. For instance, I found mulches to be really easy but I'm not sure I would have said that if I encountered it on the real thing. Ditto for dinosaurs, it's a manageable game (still time consuming) but I probably would have crapped my pants if I saw that on the real thing.

When PT62 comes out, I expect that a lot of people will say they were "easy" then bitch about the -14 or whatever crazy curve there might be. People who didn't write Oct 2010 said our curve was too easy, but the exam wasn't that easy if you were writing it for real (crazy fatigue set in during LR1 where I went -10, but got -0 on LG.) Then, come June 2011 we're all going to complain about some crazy LG or RC section and this cycle will keep on repeating itself.

Haha the cycle of the LSAT, I have a feeling it will never change.