PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
darkatillam2

Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:40 pm

PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

This game wasn't particularly hard until # 17. What are they asking?

No more than two loads of the same material are hauled consecutively...

Does that mean only SS and MM blocks? (no MMM or SSS blocks)

If that's the case I found M SS MM SS works, but none of those correspond to an answer choice. Did I just misread this question?

Really stumped. This pisses me off because I've never had a problem solving a LG ever. Little help?

Manhattan LSAT Noah

Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

darkatillam2 wrote:If that's the case I found M SS MM SS works

how many cleanings would that require?

darkatillam2

Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

3, which is the max allowed.

Is the question stating that there can only be two consecutive loads total (2 cleanings max)?

What throws me is the "two loads of the same material". I had assumed that means only blocks of two loads of each type. IE SS or MM blocks....

SanDiegoJake

Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 3:17 pm

Re: PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

Yep, you're understanding the question correctly (No MMM nor SSS, only blocks of 2 consecutive. Still 3 cleanings allowed.)

The scenario you're missing is MM-SS-M-SS, which gives you answer choice B.

I found this by being thorough in my diagramming of scenarios. Beginning with the M locked in 5th, I started diagramming all possibilities of what could be true with 3 scenarios: A 2nd M in a row at 4 (your scenario), a 2nd M in a row at 6 (which didn't work, as too many cleanings were required), and this possibility - no 2nd M in a row. Leading me to MM-SS-M-SS.

Manhattan LSAT Noah

Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

darkatillam2 wrote:3, which is the max allowed.

cough, cough, right, I was testing you.

Or, I misremembered the rule as only allowing 2

lakers3peat

Posts: 464
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:10 pm

Re: PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:

Or, I misremembered the rule as only allowing 2

noah fail!

darkatillam2

Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

Thanks SD Jake!

I felt that this PT had a lot of goofy wording in the LG section. It made the section itself a lot more difficult for me.

#10 was also gave me a crap load of trouble.

They say if J>M then what could be the order from earliest to latest?

Well, I failed to see how you can make an order without including J and M in between some of the other lists.

Because L, P > J >M

but one of the rules is L, M > H.

Therefore it has to go something like L,P > J > M > H with G not last.

None of the answer choices fitted to what I had pictured in my mind. Meaning, I didn't assume that the orders they were giving us were the orders of the people WITHOUT J>M included.

That really through me for a loop. Did anyone else experience this?

Afterward I figured it was (A) simply because it was the only answer choice that had L and P before H without G being last.

justbubbles

Posts: 177
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 8:20 pm

Re: PT 60 - LG #17 - Help help help

LSAT Blog's Steve Schwartz has an amazing solution to this question.

darkatillam2

Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:40 pm