## A little help on PT 35, Game 4, Q23

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

Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:13 pm

### A little help on PT 35, Game 4, Q23

Hey guys, I've started drilling basic linear games. I'm at the phase where I'm taking as long as I need for accuracy. I got 18 - 22 correct on this not-too-conventional basic linear. I'm having trouble with understanding why (e) is correct for 23. The one rule states that P and S are at least one slot before M and at least one slot after N.

Based on the initial constraints the line looks like _OR_M_ _. Looking at 23, based on that local condition and the original constraint about "specialty" and the fact that P and S must come at least one before M, is it not the case that P must go immediately to the left of M to make _ORPM_ _?

So why is the correct Must Be True answer that P is at least 1 before S? Wouldn't that at the very least make S in the same slot as M thereby violating the initial constraint about P and S being at least 1 before M?

I'm sure I'm just missing something stupid and it's going to be embarassing, but this has been driving me nuts, I can't see what I'm doing wrong, especially since I got all the other questions right! Thanks for any help.

lrslayer

Posts: 576
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:38 am

### Re: A little help on PT 35, Game 4, Q23

This is E because after you have eliminated all the places each can't be placed due to the "shared speciality not in the same or CONSECUTIVE years rule", you should have got this set up:

N O R S M __ T

Then P can go anywhere before M. Unless P shares a specialty with M. Then P must be places with R or sooner to observe the consecutive rule. This would effectively place P before S in this situation.

EDIT-- P can actually only go with O or R in this situation. I assume you know it has to go after N!

locthebloke

Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:13 pm

### Re: A little help on PT 35, Game 4, Q23

Thanks, I'll go back and give it another look.