Top Law Schools

[MOD EDIT]

Does LSAC really do this and switch the orders of the games/passages??

There is no guarantee which types of games you'll get or what order they'll be in. Of COURSE they mix it up!

Really? I've taken the LSAT twice and have never heard of questions/games being mixed up WITHIN a section. I could be wrong, but I thought that only the sections themselves were mixed up...

This question is definitely in the right subsection.

yea i never heard of switching order of games. that seems unfair. what you guys think. do they do really mix orders of games?

i know its in the wrong section. my bad

On logic games, there's a lot less certainty regarding order of difficulty. Although the games generally go from easiest to hardest, I've had my last game be easiest in the section, and my first game be the hardest (though this is more rare).

If you don't think you'll be getting above a 166 or so, I suggest spending a minute or so scanning each game and picking which order you want to work them in (although don't get too wrapped up in this). If you're aiming for 167 or above, you pretty much have to get perfect or near perfect on games so just do 'em in order.

Man, I wish my female friends knew what a loose sequence game was.

zomginternets wrote:On logic games, there's a lot less certainty regarding order of difficulty. Although the games generally go from easiest to hardest, I've had my last game be easiest in the section, and my first game be the hardest (though this is more rare).

If you don't think you'll be getting above a 166 or so, I suggest spending a minute or so scanning each game and picking which order you want to work them in (although don't get too wrapped up in this). If you're aiming for 167 or above, you pretty much have to get perfect or near perfect on games so just do 'em in order.

I got a 167 with- 9 games so you're wrong!

games can definitely be in different orders. In December, people reported having conferences/stained glass 1,2. For me they were 2,3

I've never heard of the order changing between tests. And I can think of very good reasons why the LSAC would not do this. My guess is that your friend is mis-remembering, or you are, or she is fucking with you. Don't worry about it. But yeah - you should take a look at the game and within 30 seconds know if it's gonna' be easy or hard and if it's one of those annoying hybrid games with few early deductions, maybe you should save it for last.

I agree that there are good reasons not to do it, but read the December waiting thread and you will find many test takers that are 100% positive of their order of games and at least 2 distinct orders. Believe it. It's not that crazy

kwais wrote:I agree that there are good reasons not to do it, but read the December waiting thread and you will find many test takers that are 100% positive of their order of games and at least 2 distinct orders. Believe it. It's not that crazy

Sounds like conversion disorder to me.

I'm pretty sure that LSAC has literature on ordering questions and the effect on performance, and thus, I'm pretty sure that this couldn't happen, unless they were to treat it like a completely different test.

Sandro wrote:

zomginternets wrote:On logic games, there's a lot less certainty regarding order of difficulty. Although the games generally go from easiest to hardest, I've had my last game be easiest in the section, and my first game be the hardest (though this is more rare).

If you don't think you'll be getting above a 166 or so, I suggest spending a minute or so scanning each game and picking which order you want to work them in (although don't get too wrapped up in this). If you're aiming for 167 or above, you pretty much have to get perfect or near perfect on games so just do 'em in order.

I got a 167 with- 9 games so you're wrong!

+1

I suck at games (it is definitely what brought my score down), but I rocked the LR and RC sections and got a 167

1.) this is in the wrong board.
2.) this didn't happen.

zomginternets wrote:On logic games, there's a lot less certainty regarding order of difficulty. Although the games generally go from easiest to hardest, I've had my last game be easiest in the section, and my first game be the hardest (though this is more rare).

If you don't think you'll be getting above a 166 or so, I suggest spending a minute or so scanning each game and picking which order you want to work them in (although don't get too wrapped up in this). If you're aiming for 167 or above, you pretty much have to get perfect or near perfect on games so just do 'em in order.

hahahahahahahahaha this is the dumbest post ever. "if you think you're gonna get a 165, you should triage. if you think you're gonna get a 167, do them in order. if you are aiming for a 167 (which is still FOURTEEN WRONG) you need to get them ALL right in the games section!"

are you fucking serious.

also, FTR, at least on my LSAT, the difference between a 165 and a 167 was 3 questions out of 101.

kwais wrote:I agree that there are good reasons not to do it, but read the December waiting thread and you will find many test takers that are 100% positive of their order of games and at least 2 distinct orders. Believe it. It's not that crazy

+1

I took the October games. 100% sure on my ordering of games. There were many people on TLS who agreed and disagreed on ordering.

FiveSermon wrote:I took the October games. 100% sure on my ordering of games. There were many people on TLS who agreed and disagreed on ordering.

You mean December? What order do you remember them in? The game is published now, so the "official" order is stained glass second.

suspicious android wrote:

FiveSermon wrote:I took the October games. 100% sure on my ordering of games. There were many people on TLS who agreed and disagreed on ordering.

You mean December? What order do you remember them in? The game is published now, so the "official" order is stained glass second.

I mean October.

suspicious android wrote:

FiveSermon wrote:I took the October games. 100% sure on my ordering of games. There were many people on TLS who agreed and disagreed on ordering.

You mean December? What order do you remember them in? The game is published now, so the "official" order is stained glass second.

If the official order is stained glass second, then it throws the previous poster's comments out the window. I remember with complete certainty that my test placed stained glass 3rd. Fact. I remember the order because I got pissed at the lack of space for the first game, hated the second game, and aced stained glass and the last game.

zomginternets wrote:On logic games, there's a lot less certainty regarding order of difficulty. Although the games generally go from easiest to hardest, I've had my last game be easiest in the section, and my first game be the hardest (though this is more rare).

If you don't think you'll be getting above a 166 or so, I suggest spending a minute or so scanning each game and picking which order you want to work them in (although don't get too wrapped up in this). If you're aiming for 167 or above, you pretty much have to get perfect or near perfect on games so just do 'em in order.

I got a 167 on the Oct 2010 LSAT

LG: -6
RC: -4
LR1: -3
LR2: -2

So it's possible with a mediocre LG performance. With that said, I kick myself for not having a better LG strategy.

I heard it's best to do games in this order: 1, 4, 2 or 3.

1st and last are always easier. I found that to be true on both June and Oct 2010 LSAT.

nelaw2010 wrote:

zomginternets wrote:On logic games, there's a lot less certainty regarding order of difficulty. Although the games generally go from easiest to hardest, I've had my last game be easiest in the section, and my first game be the hardest (though this is more rare).

If you don't think you'll be getting above a 166 or so, I suggest spending a minute or so scanning each game and picking which order you want to work them in (although don't get too wrapped up in this). If you're aiming for 167 or above, you pretty much have to get perfect or near perfect on games so just do 'em in order.

I got a 167 on the Oct 2010 LSAT

LG: -6
RC: -4
LR1: -3
LR2: -2

So it's possible with a mediocre LG performance. With that said, I kick myself for not having a better LG strategy.

I heard it's best to do games in this order: 1, 4, 2 or 3.

1st and last are always easier. I found that to be true on both June and Oct 2010 LSAT.

Both of these posts are wrong.

First off, the guy who says you have to get perfect on LG for a 167 has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. I went -4 or -5 on games, and I scored a 169. This claim is ridiculous, and I almost wish a mod would delete his post.

Second, I agree that the games are usually in order of difficulty, but not always. Every test is different. The bolded section of the second quote is wrong. There is no certain format that LSAC always adheres to with the LSAT. The poster even admits to base this fact on only two tests. Again, ridiculous.

Pricer wrote:

nelaw2010 wrote:

zomginternets wrote:On logic games, there's a lot less certainty regarding order of difficulty. Although the games generally go from easiest to hardest, I've had my last game be easiest in the section, and my first game be the hardest (though this is more rare).

If you don't think you'll be getting above a 166 or so, I suggest spending a minute or so scanning each game and picking which order you want to work them in (although don't get too wrapped up in this). If you're aiming for 167 or above, you pretty much have to get perfect or near perfect on games so just do 'em in order.

I got a 167 on the Oct 2010 LSAT

LG: -6
RC: -4
LR1: -3
LR2: -2

So it's possible with a mediocre LG performance. With that said, I kick myself for not having a better LG strategy.

I heard it's best to do games in this order: 1, 4, 2 or 3.

1st and last are always easier. I found that to be true on both June and Oct 2010 LSAT.

Both of these posts are wrong.

First off, the guy who says you have to get perfect on LG for a 167 has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. I went -4 or -5 on games, and I scored a 169. This claim is ridiculous, and I almost wish a mod would delete his post.

Second, I agree that the games are usually in order of difficulty, but not always. Every test is different. The bolded section of the second quote is wrong. There is no certain format that LSAC always adheres to with the LSAT. The poster even admits to base this fact on only two tests. Again, ridiculous.

I went -1 LG -2 RC -2 LR -9 LR lol.

I got 8 wrong on games (on one game no less) and got a 169. FUCK YOU, STAINED GLASS WINDOWS FOR KEEPING ME OUT OF THE 170s

EDIT: my mistake, i only missed 7 on that one game. I missed one other question in games, though for a total of 8/15 wrong being on the games section. I was PTing anywhere from 0-3 wrong on games. And I was taught to always preview games and reading comp. The order of difficulty for LR is the only predictable one with the 3rd open page always being hardest.