Are you ready for total DOMINATION?!! (Feb. 2011)

thsmthcrmnl
Posts: 247
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:07 am

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby thsmthcrmnl » Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:35 pm

Dotson525 wrote:In your opinion, how does the previous Feb. test you've taken compared to the other tests? Since Feb. is undisclosed, there is little to compare it to.


That's the only one I've taken for real. It was exactly like most of the PT tests in the 50s. (Except, mercifully, there were no dinosaurs.) I thought at the time some of the questions seemed less tightly written, but in retrospect, I'm pretty sure that was just test-day nerves.

User avatar
8675309
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby 8675309 » Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:45 pm

Is anyone else finding it hard to study because of the NFL playoffs?

I am dying here. All I wanna do is watch some football.

User avatar
Dotson525
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 9:40 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby Dotson525 » Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:52 pm

thsmthcrmnl wrote:
Dotson525 wrote:In your opinion, how does the previous Feb. test you've taken compared to the other tests? Since Feb. is undisclosed, there is little to compare it to.


That's the only one I've taken for real. It was exactly like most of the PT tests in the 50s. (Except, mercifully, there were no dinosaurs.) I thought at the time some of the questions seemed less tightly written, but in retrospect, I'm pretty sure that was just test-day nerves.



Thanks for the input. Reading around, you hear some pretty strange stories concerning the Feb. tests. I've taken the lsat before, just retaking to score higher for additional funding.

User avatar
Pleasye
Posts: 7957
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby Pleasye » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:02 pm

Dotson525 wrote:
thsmthcrmnl wrote:
Dotson525 wrote:In your opinion, how does the previous Feb. test you've taken compared to the other tests? Since Feb. is undisclosed, there is little to compare it to.


That's the only one I've taken for real. It was exactly like most of the PT tests in the 50s. (Except, mercifully, there were no dinosaurs.) I thought at the time some of the questions seemed less tightly written, but in retrospect, I'm pretty sure that was just test-day nerves.



Thanks for the input. Reading around, you hear some pretty strange stories concerning the Feb. tests. I've taken the lsat before, just retaking to score higher for additional funding.

This is my theory: you know how after every LSAT people come on here and are like ZOMG hardest/easiest test ever, LG WAS SO HARD, LR isa chaanginggg, RC made no sense, LSAC IS TRYING TO TRICK US!!1!1one, etc. That happens EVERY time, but then the test comes out and its like, "oh, it was a normal test just like all the other ones". However, the February test has just as much discussion and freaking out as the other tests but nobody ever gets to see it so there's still a mystery as to whether or not its actually different.

User avatar
vissidarte27
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby vissidarte27 » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:10 pm

Is it weird that it doesn't bother me that it's undisclosed? I don't think I've ever taken a standardized test that was disclosed, so I was pretty surprised to find that LSAT releases your test (on other test dates, obviously) and you can see where you went wrong.

User avatar
Pleasye
Posts: 7957
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby Pleasye » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:23 pm

vissidarte27 wrote:Is it weird that it doesn't bother me that it's undisclosed? I don't think I've ever taken a standardized test that was disclosed, so I was pretty surprised to find that LSAT releases your test (on other test dates, obviously) and you can see where you went wrong.

I don't think its weird. The only reason it bothers me now is because I took it in October and got to see where I went wrong then so its weird that I won't this time. If I get in the area of my target score I won't give a shiiiit that I can't see the test.

User avatar
vissidarte27
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby vissidarte27 » Sun Jan 16, 2011 7:13 pm

Why are these 50s tests kicking my butt???? I want to go back to the 30s where I was getting 173s instead of these stupid 163s that I'm getting now.

WTF, LSAT? WTF?

(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)

User avatar
Pleasye
Posts: 7957
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby Pleasye » Sun Jan 16, 2011 7:15 pm

vissidarte27 wrote:Why are these 50s tests kicking my butt???? I want to go back to the 30s where I was getting 173s instead of these stupid 163s that I'm getting now.

WTF, LSAT? WTF?

(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)

Where are you losing points? Also, you were doing tests untimed, there's a huuuge difference between untimed tests and timed tests so that may also be affecting you.

User avatar
vissidarte27
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby vissidarte27 » Sun Jan 16, 2011 7:21 pm

LSpleaseee wrote:
vissidarte27 wrote:Why are these 50s tests kicking my butt???? I want to go back to the 30s where I was getting 173s instead of these stupid 163s that I'm getting now.

WTF, LSAT? WTF?

(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)

Where are you losing points? Also, you were doing tests untimed, there's a huuuge difference between untimed tests and timed tests so that may also be affecting you.


My last couple of 30s tests were timed so I don't think that's the main factor.

I'm losing points on all of the sections, frankly. My last 30s PT was like this:

LR1: -2
LG: -0
LR2: -4
RC: -3

I scored a 173.

I took PT54 yesterday, and it looked like this:

RC: -6
LR1: -4
LG: -3
LR2: -5

I scored a 163.

It looks like it hit me across the board, not in any one specific area. I mean, it's better than PT 53 which was better than PT52, but still. That's a BIG difference.

Lasker
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:17 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby Lasker » Sun Jan 16, 2011 10:16 pm

thsmthcrmnl wrote:
Lasker wrote:Got a bit lucky on the RC though; the final passage had some difficult questions where I didn't feel certain of my answer. I seem to have at least 1-2 questions like that on every recent (PT 50 on) RC section. Finding a way to eliminate those will be one of my main goals in the next few weeks. Does anyone have any advice?


Keep in mind that an LSAT question won't have a good answer and a goodish answer; it has a right answer and a wrong answer. If you're unsure about a question, it's because you're missing something, maybe something as subtle as a word like "might" instead of "will" or calling a subsidiary conclusion "the conclusion" instead of "a conclusion." In the time left over after finishing a section, I'll go back and spend a few minutes on just one question I was unsure of to really carefully parse the diction of the two choices I'm considering.


Yeah this is important advice, thanks for the reminder; this was a key realization for me on the path to consistently beating LR sections. I guess I just need more practice to feel as confident eliminating wrong RC answers. I'll just keep telling myself: its not that they are less objective, its just that you are missing something.

The LSAT is a fascinating test. Even though I am getting high scores I can still see huge room for improvement.

User avatar
JenDarby
Posts: 13285
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:02 am

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby JenDarby » Mon Jan 17, 2011 4:23 am

Well, it's official, just registered, late fee and all, and ordered preptests 57-60. If nothing else, having already applied and been accepted to a few schools, I'm at least not the least bit nervous this time around. Though if I blow my first score out of the water, I WILL regret not having applied to any real reaches.

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:18 pm

vissidarte27 wrote:
LSpleaseee wrote:
vissidarte27 wrote:Why are these 50s tests kicking my butt???? I want to go back to the 30s where I was getting 173s instead of these stupid 163s that I'm getting now.

WTF, LSAT? WTF?

(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)

Where are you losing points? Also, you were doing tests untimed, there's a huuuge difference between untimed tests and timed tests so that may also be affecting you.


My last couple of 30s tests were timed so I don't think that's the main factor.

I'm losing points on all of the sections, frankly. My last 30s PT was like this:

LR1: -2
LG: -0
LR2: -4
RC: -3

I scored a 173.

I took PT54 yesterday, and it looked like this:

RC: -6
LR1: -4
LG: -3
LR2: -5

I scored a 163.

It looks like it hit me across the board, not in any one specific area. I mean, it's better than PT 53 which was better than PT52, but still. That's a BIG difference.


I sucked at the 50s test as well. Watched myself plummet in that generation from a 166 to a 160 to a 157. I almost lost my mind. A huge 'WTF?!' My score went back up with some of the later ones, but the previous tests felt like a bad dream.
I think LR and LG have been getting trickier over the past few years. I'm planning on doing a massive review of the 50s tests this week to see if there's a particular trend that's killing my score.

User avatar
Pleasye
Posts: 7957
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby Pleasye » Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:21 pm

JenDarby wrote:Well, it's official, just registered, late fee and all, and ordered preptests 57-60. If nothing else, having already applied and been accepted to a few schools, I'm at least not the least bit nervous this time around. Though if I blow my first score out of the water, I WILL regret not having applied to any real reaches.

Why are you retaking? Waitlists/scholarship money?

Sandro
Posts: 2526
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby Sandro » Mon Jan 17, 2011 2:46 pm

guys if you havent gotten LG down on the most recent tests I suggest focusing on it. It is only my personal experience but I missed a combined ~17 or so on Oct and Dec almost half of my total mistakes , and I scored in the 90-95th percentile each time. If I could go back I would alter my strategy to make sure I got 3 games down pat and got 2 or maybe even 3 right on the last game.... I missed -11 on my first ever LSAT a year+ ago and only improved to -9 on my most recent , despite doing the LG bible multiple times, Atlas LG guide, and doing dozens and dozens of games/sections.

User avatar
JenDarby
Posts: 13285
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:02 am

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby JenDarby » Mon Jan 17, 2011 6:08 pm

LSpleaseee wrote:
JenDarby wrote:Well, it's official, just registered, late fee and all, and ordered preptests 57-60. If nothing else, having already applied and been accepted to a few schools, I'm at least not the least bit nervous this time around. Though if I blow my first score out of the water, I WILL regret not having applied to any real reaches.

Why are you retaking? Waitlists/scholarship money?


Yea, I'm worried about UCLA. I think my chances at being accepted are decent, but they certainly won't be giving me any money. If I somehow manage to pull an amazing score, I may also wait and reapply next year, since the highest ranked school I applied to this year was Cornell.

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Mon Jan 17, 2011 7:38 pm

Sandro777 wrote:guys if you havent gotten LG down on the most recent tests I suggest focusing on it. It is only my personal experience but I missed a combined ~17 or so on Oct and Dec almost half of my total mistakes , and I scored in the 90-95th percentile each time. If I could go back I would alter my strategy to make sure I got 3 games down pat and got 2 or maybe even 3 right on the last game.... I missed -11 on my first ever LSAT a year+ ago and only improved to -9 on my most recent , despite doing the LG bible multiple times, Atlas LG guide, and doing dozens and dozens of games/sections.


I am drilling games this whole week. LR sucked the most for me on the recent test, but I just need to get back on track with games before I tackle LR again.

User avatar
99.9luft
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby 99.9luft » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:24 am

I am doing this old-ass testmasters handout called "LRO" - which is 450 LR questions from the 90s tests. Timing all of them. So far did 270 questions and got 88% of them right -- the same as getting -6 on both LR (50 questions) sections in a given PT. Not good for someone shooting for 170s, if you ask me. [goes back to studying]
Last edited by 99.9luft on Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DarkPhantom
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:45 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby DarkPhantom » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:36 am

Man the damn NFL play offs ruined my momentum! Bah...struggling to get back into it...especially since I'm taking a PT in the morning! >:(

User avatar
8675309
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby 8675309 » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:41 am

DarkPhantom wrote:Man the damn NFL play offs ruined my momentum! Bah...struggling to get back into it...especially since I'm taking a PT in the morning! >:(


I feel you. I might be going to the Packers game on Sunday too. Talk about ruining momentum for the rest of the week.

edited spelling error
Last edited by 8675309 on Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

DarkPhantom
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:45 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby DarkPhantom » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:44 am

^what?! Are you kidding me?!?!

T_T

p.s. are ear buds allowed during the test?

User avatar
99.9luft
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby 99.9luft » Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:10 am

DarkPhantom wrote:^what?! Are you kidding me?!?!

T_T

p.s. are ear buds allowed during the test?



No

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:27 am

99.9luft wrote:I am doing this old-ass testmasters handout called "LR Odyssey" - which is 450 LR questions from the 90s tests. Timing all of them. So far did 270 questions and got 88% of them right -- the same as getting -6 on both LR (50 questions) sections in a given PT. Not good for someone shooting for 170s, if you ask me. [goes back to studying]


I must find this for myself. Are they grouped by type?

User avatar
8675309
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby 8675309 » Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:28 am

^what?! Are you kidding me?!?!


Nope, I find out tomorrow if I can get the tickets. I'm pretty excited. I have my first day of classes the next day though, so that's going to kind of suck.

User avatar
99.9luft
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby 99.9luft » Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:31 am

SchopenhauerFTW wrote:
99.9luft wrote:I am doing this old-ass testmasters handout called "LR Odyssey" - which is 450 LR questions from the 90s tests. Timing all of them. So far did 270 questions and got 88% of them right -- the same as getting -6 on both LR (50 questions) sections in a given PT. Not good for someone shooting for 170s, if you ask me. [goes back to studying]


I must find this for myself. Are they grouped by type?


No, not grouped by type, it's all mixed.

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:04 am

Well, full speed ahead.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”