June 2011 Study Group

User avatar
Neidermeyer519
Posts: 244
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 12:20 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Neidermeyer519 » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:19 pm

Haha I have been studying the LSAT off and on for 3 years now though, so it's not like I haven't had time to get familair with it. Now just watch, on the actual test I'll butcher it and end up with a 160 :/ lol

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:28 pm

Haha ok, that's fair - I've only been studying since mid-January. I really hope the first time's the charm though and I don't have to retake. I just want to be doooone.

User avatar
Neidermeyer519
Posts: 244
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 12:20 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Neidermeyer519 » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:37 pm

well then I will keep my fingers corssed for ya! :)

jim-green
Posts: 808
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby jim-green » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:47 pm

Eichörnchen wrote:I'm jealous that I am a teetotaler and pretty completely devoid of funtime and you still crush me score-wise :)
I think what Florida said earlier was that it's not inspite of being teetotalers that we can't score as high as Neidermayer. It's because of being teetotalers.

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:51 pm

Thanks Neidermeyer and Jim, I think that I will add a gigantic bottle of vodka to my costco shopping list. :wink: I mean, whichever way it goes in June, I will use it. I'm hoping for "woot-woot, nailed it" party timeeee more than the alternative.

User avatar
soj
Posts: 7735
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:14 pm

I've drunk only once since starting LSAT prep. Maybe that's why I'm always agitated these days. :lol:

Ugh, I've been so busy today with other work that I haven't had time to do a PT. I wonder if it's even worth it to attempt one if I can't start it till 6pm at the earliest.

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:39 pm

soj wrote:I've drunk only once since starting LSAT prep. Maybe that's why I'm always agitated these days. :lol:

Ugh, I've been so busy today with other work that I haven't had time to do a PT. I wonder if it's even worth it to attempt one if I can't start it till 6pm at the earliest.

The most I've had is yesterday when I had 3 mimosas at my family Easter party :lol: Besides that, I had one drink with friends (and I was working at the same time :? ). But then again I'm not much of a drinker (I've only been actually drunk like once haha) but all the studying is certainly enough to turn me into one.

On a duller LSAT-related note, I was thinking of getting Ace the LSAT LG but I'm on the fence about it. Any opinions?

User avatar
Strange
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 5:23 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Strange » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:06 pm

I scored a 168 on both PT43 and PT47 over the weekend. Nothing new really - near-perfection on LG, with a -0 on PT47. But RC has been difficult, and LR isn't getting any better. I've been taking two PT's a weekend but I'm going to change course. I've taken six PT's in the past 3 weeks, and I've gotten a 167, a 169, and four 168's. So I've definitely plateaued, mostly due to lack of LR/RC improvement. I've ordered the Atlas MLSAT guides for both RC and LR to freshen myself up on fundamentals and I'm going to start hitting those hard and dial down the LG drilling. I did the LR bible already, but it doesn't seem to be helping me much anymore after the initial improvement.

jim-green
Posts: 808
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:55 pm

Asking this again

Postby jim-green » Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:29 pm

If anyone is interested...
Just emerged quite scathed from a bruising battle with PT44 S2 LR section. I think it is one of the hardest ever. Witness #13, where the correct answer is a negation of a double negative and involves some playing with few and most. Obviously, I chose the incorrect ans D. Anyone know what makes ans A correct? Another loss was #21, which I think the study grp went over last weekend. If I do a Venn diagram, I can figure it out. Did not think to try this when doing the section timed. Anyone do #21 without a Venn diagram?
Anyone attending the free MLSAT workshop tonight?

User avatar
Neidermeyer519
Posts: 244
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 12:20 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Neidermeyer519 » Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:35 pm

I really do think the cutting lose once or twice a week helps me a lot, because it allows my mind to deviate from grueling logic. I do think it's important to not overprep, but for some people overprepping might work to their advantage. Different strokes I suppose. I guess my advice is this: if you feel burned out and stop making progress, walk away and have some fun. Come back rejuvenated and go at it again.

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:48 pm

Yea I think it is about time for me to have a day off. Sadly today has been a day off from studying because I am babysitting all day. I thought, "Oh just me and a 6 month old. I can totally do games all day. Sure, I can do it no prob" WRONG. SEVEN HOURS OF CONSTANT CRYING. :shock:

User avatar
soj
Posts: 7735
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:57 pm

Eichörnchen wrote:Yea I think it is about time for me to have a day off. Sadly today has been a day off from studying because I am babysitting all day. I thought, "Oh just me and a 6 month old. I can totally do games all day. Sure, I can do it no prob" WRONG. SEVEN HOURS OF CONSTANT CRYING. :shock:

Show him some LSAT problems to scare him into stopping. :roll:

Or maybe it'll make it worse.

User avatar
matvei
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:25 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby matvei » Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:54 pm

Does anyone switch up their entire method when they get to comparative reading passages? I just realized that there is something fundamentally flawed with how I approach comparative reading, because RC is one of my best if not my best section without comparative reading and my worst when it is in it. It may be the overall difficulty of all of the passages but the comparative passage takes up all my time.

This is exactly what happened to me in December (dental caries... hopefully before your time :/) Anyone have some advice?

User avatar
NomadicScribe
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:06 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby NomadicScribe » Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:19 pm

Viper wrote:By the way, I found the explanations to all the questions for tests 1-56, I don't know if you guys have these already or if some of you even need them, but I don't mind sharing these with everyone. If anyone has 57+ that would be awesome.



This would be fantastic! Is there any way you could put it up on Google Docs for easier sharing?

User avatar
mickeyD
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby mickeyD » Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:37 pm

Time to step up my LR game, ordered MLSAT LR Guide this morning. I'm working on assumption/justify questions and using LRB's method of solving Justify questions "mechanistically." It's been a while since I read the LRB, and neglecting this method has me spending too much time looking for TCR. I need to start doing a better job of noticing when new terms are introduced in the conclusion.

I may be wrong (I only read it once), but does the LRB not distinguish between Sufficient Assumption and Necessary Assumption questions? For example, "the conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?" (sufficient) versus "which one of the following is an assumption that the argument requires?" (necessary).

User avatar
coldshoulder
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby coldshoulder » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:02 pm

The LRB calls sufficient assumption questions justify questions.

User avatar
soj
Posts: 7735
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:03 pm

Ehh, still haven't started PT44. Too busy today!

I guess today's my day off.

User avatar
Neatrends
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Neatrends » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:05 pm

Hi everyone,

I've been meaning to actually join the thread for a while; reading about everyone's progress has been a huge motivational factor. So thanks :mrgreen:

Had a couple questions, two of them directed at the LG ninjas on here:

1. The LG bible recommends reading through the game stimulus and rules once all the way through before beginning to diagram/make inferences. Does everyone follow this advice? Anyone who thinks its better to save valuable time by beginning to diagram on the first read through?

2. How much time is there between sections on the real thing? Is there at least a minute? Or does the proctor say "Time is up, Turn to section 2, you have 35 minutes, GO!" I like to reset my watch to :00 seconds at the beginning of every section so I'm wondering if thatll be possible.

3. Does everyone tackle the LG questions in the order they are presented? Also, if no answers can be eliminated off the bat, do you tackle the answer choices A-E, E-A, at random? Any advice would be appreciated.

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:09 pm

mickeyD wrote:Time to step up my LR game, ordered MLSAT LR Guide this morning. I'm working on assumption/justify questions and using LRB's method of solving Justify questions "mechanistically." It's been a while since I read the LRB, and neglecting this method has me spending too much time looking for TCR. I need to start doing a better job of noticing when new terms are introduced in the conclusion.

I may be wrong (I only read it once), but does the LRB not distinguish between Sufficient Assumption and Necessary Assumption questions? For example, "the conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?" (sufficient) versus "which one of the following is an assumption that the argument requires?" (necessary).

Graduating from LG drilling? Nice work. I just ordered Ace the LSAT LG cause I heard it was worth a look. That means I have 2 more LG books to go through after I finish my bible review. I hope PS's sequencing method starts to make sense. I just see all those arrows and dotted lines and get completely confused haha. Hope MLSAT helps you on those LR- I hate suff assumption questions.

Oh and Soj I tried to make the baby help me with LG and it didn't work ;) I'm finally home and have an energy drink, a cupcake and a stack of games. I cannot let today be my break from studying because it was a torturous day and I'd rather save that for my bf's birthday this week haha. Ooh it shall be a fun night - games, games gamessss...zzzzzzz

FloridaCoastalorbust
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby FloridaCoastalorbust » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:27 pm

Eichörnchen wrote:Graduating from LG drilling? Nice work. I just ordered Ace the LSAT LG cause I heard it was worth a look. That means I have 2 more LG books to go through after I finish my bible review. I hope PS's sequencing method starts to make sense. I just see all those arrows and dotted lines and get completely confused haha. Hope MLSAT helps you on those LR- I hate suff assumption questions.


If you're talking about PS's 'pure sequencing' I would look into Manhattans strategy, I like it more. I went to Barnes and Noble and just read their LG book in one sitting and that was probably the one thing I favored over PS (sorry Noah :) ) Take the phrase, "A is played before B and after C." PS recommends C>A>B, while Manhattan recommends C-A-B. I like using the '-' symbol instead of '>'. It seems much more manageable when the sequence becomes long and tricky and ignores the arrows and lines of PS

User avatar
mickeyD
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby mickeyD » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:28 pm

Haha no chance at graduating from LG drilling, gonna finish up the 20s LG sections tonight and hopefully 41-45 by the end of the week. Not taking another PT unless I get -0s on at least half of them.

Feel free to diagram that one for practice folks :D

FloridaCoastalorbust
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby FloridaCoastalorbust » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:32 pm

Neatrends wrote:Hi everyone,

I've been meaning to actually join the thread for a while; reading about everyone's progress has been a huge motivational factor. So thanks :mrgreen:

Had a couple questions, two of them directed at the LG ninjas on here:

1. The LG bible recommends reading through the game stimulus and rules once all the way through before beginning to diagram/make inferences. Does everyone follow this advice? Anyone who thinks its better to save valuable time by beginning to diagram on the first read through?

2. How much time is there between sections on the real thing? Is there at least a minute? Or does the proctor say "Time is up, Turn to section 2, you have 35 minutes, GO!" I like to reset my watch to :00 seconds at the beginning of every section so I'm wondering if thatll be possible.

3. Does everyone tackle the LG questions in the order they are presented? Also, if no answers can be eliminated off the bat, do you tackle the answer choices A-E, E-A, at random? Any advice would be appreciated.


1. I generally read through it really quickly to see what type of game it is and how the conditions are working, and also to get a handle on the distribution before I start diagramming. But this is no more than about 10-20 secs.

2. From what I understand there is anywhere from 10-15 seconds in between sections.

3. I usually tackle the questions in order, but if there is particularly time consuming/troublesome question I'll skip it and return. Some advise against this though, because a potential hypo you build from a question may be pivotal in understanding the next question, so you could actually shoot yourself in the foot. If I am super low on time or am completely stumped I usually start with AC D and move on to E, C, B, and lastly A. This is simply because of the probability of those answers occurring on previous LSATs (take a look at PS's guessing strategy for LG). This strategy is actually really helpful for me sometimes and I've yet to see anyone endorse it (or even mention it, really)

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:39 pm

Florida, I've heard MLSAT's method is better. I think I'll give it a shot (my library will be enormous soon. God I'm poor.) and Mickey I love how as soon as you type out a phrase with conditionals, you know we all are triggered to begin diagramming :) I just used the phrase "calls into question" on fb and was like, hmm I think the LSAT speak is getting in my head. If I start using "presupposes" and "adducing" I will seek help.

User avatar
tmon
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 10:52 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby tmon » Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:18 pm

Holy cow. I've been busy...and not with LSAT studying, unfortunately (kind of :lol: ). I did manage to get in one PT over the weekend, With a -13 raw and only -4 on RC! Hopefully that's the start of a trend. If I can just stay consistent I should be -3 on each LR, -0 LG, and -4 RC....and then it's just a matter of slight improvement from there and I'll be golden! Easier said than done, of course...

Worked for two hours on MLSAT's LR guide today...only about a 1/4 left. It's taken longer than expected, but that might not be a bad thing. I thought I'd fly through all of the formal logic section, but the last half or so was a challenge. Hopefully it helped. At first I felt like it was making me really slow with my formal logic, but I often don't write it out on the test, so solidifying it in my mind can only do good things. Going to hopefully finish it this week, see what my PTs look like, and then either do some drilling or go back over the LR bible.


Neatrends wrote:Hi everyone,

I've been meaning to actually join the thread for a while; reading about everyone's progress has been a huge motivational factor. So thanks :mrgreen:

Had a couple questions, two of them directed at the LG ninjas on here:

1. The LG bible recommends reading through the game stimulus and rules once all the way through before beginning to diagram/make inferences. Does everyone follow this advice? Anyone who thinks its better to save valuable time by beginning to diagram on the first read through?

2. How much time is there between sections on the real thing? Is there at least a minute? Or does the proctor say "Time is up, Turn to section 2, you have 35 minutes, GO!" I like to reset my watch to :00 seconds at the beginning of every section so I'm wondering if thatll be possible.

3. Does everyone tackle the LG questions in the order they are presented? Also, if no answers can be eliminated off the bat, do you tackle the answer choices A-E, E-A, at random? Any advice would be appreciated.



1. As Florida said, I really quickly figure out what kind of game it is before anything else, and immediately start putting my diagram together. I generally don't need the rules for that, so I usually write the rules as they come. Obviously there are down sides of this, particularly in sequencing games where you start adding on to chains, but I write it with enough space that it generally works out, or is a few seconds delay to make a new sequence at worst. This is mostly just from preference and what I've grown to prefer after lots of drilling.

2. I've heard that proctors CAN vary greatly, but when I took the test in 09, I had plenty of time to reset my watch. I wouldn't be too concerned about it. Honestly, if the proctor started time too fast for me, I'd still just reset my watch and compose myself. Best to get off on a good foot, I think.

3. The vast majority of the time I do the whole section in order. I think a large reason for this is that I've gotten pretty fast at the easier games, so there's no reason to slow down with those games, and on the harder ones I then have lots of time left over so I don't need to worry unless I'm really having issues. Occasionally, if a question is taking me way too long I'll skip it and come back to it after I finish the last question of that game. I usually don't mess with the answer order on LG, because if your setup is good there are few ways they can "trick" you into wrong answers compared to LR, I think.

Viper
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:43 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Viper » Tue Apr 26, 2011 3:16 am

Neatrends wrote:Hi everyone,

I've been meaning to actually join the thread for a while; reading about everyone's progress has been a huge motivational factor. So thanks :mrgreen:

Had a couple questions, two of them directed at the LG ninjas on here:

1. The LG bible recommends reading through the game stimulus and rules once all the way through before beginning to diagram/make inferences. Does everyone follow this advice? Anyone who thinks its better to save valuable time by beginning to diagram on the first read through?

2. How much time is there between sections on the real thing? Is there at least a minute? Or does the proctor say "Time is up, Turn to section 2, you have 35 minutes, GO!" I like to reset my watch to :00 seconds at the beginning of every section so I'm wondering if thatll be possible.

3. Does everyone tackle the LG questions in the order they are presented? Also, if no answers can be eliminated off the bat, do you tackle the answer choices A-E, E-A, at random? Any advice would be appreciated.


1. I start diagramming as soon as i'm sure of what type of game it is and what type of diagram will easily represent the game, no matter whether it takes only the first sentence or until i get to the last rule. I don't want to start diagramming something and then realize that i have to start over, but there is no point in not diagramming when you are sure that you can start setting up your diagram.

2. Never taken an official LSAT, but the proctored practice i took (sponsored by Kaplan) we had about 45 seconds to a minute in between each section. Enough time to take a sip of water (don't know if water is allowed in the actual test), reset my watch, and jump right into the next section.

3. In logic games i always do the games in order. If a particular question is giving me trouble, I will work through the rest of the questions in that game first, and then come back to that question last. I've noticed that while answering the remainder of the questions, lots of deductions, inferences, and examples tend to sprout up that weren't previously established. If you can not eliminate ANY of the answer choices, that means you are missing a key deduction/restriction in the game, and once again it would most likely be best to continue through the game, answering the questions that you can, drawing as many inferences as possible about what can and can not be possible about the game. I've had quite a few games where i would get stumped on the "could/must be true/false" questions, just to go through the rest of the questions, and realize that it was a limited option game (4-5 or less possible solutions for the game). Making all the necessary deductions/inferences in a game is key, and can be the difference between finishing the game in 5 minutes, or in 10 minutes. NOTE: on almost all games where the first question is "which of the following could (not) be an acceptable solution", as I am transcribing each rule into my diagram, I will go through the answer choices and eliminate any choice that violates that rule. This is just something I've noticed saves me anywhere from 10 to 30 seconds on each game.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests