LR LG LR LR RC - Which is experimental? Forum

[thelawschoolproject]

Thanks! One of my 25s had only 4 questions (22-25) on the last two pages spread, while the other had I think 5 or 6 on the last 2 page spread. Any clue what your 25er was like, structurally?

Last question, I promise. Damn having LR as Experimental

I definitely didn't have any that only had four on the back spread. Mine were either 5 or maybe 6, definitely not 4.

[gaucho11]

Tite i think that would make my section 1 experimental because I didnt hit the end of that section and I remember a genuine confidence question.

I'd virtual hug you now

[lsatprepguy]

By any chance to do you remember if heavy metals and/or movie rental coupons were in your 25 or 26 question LR? Really appreciate the help

If I remember correctly my test went:

LG: 23
LR: 26
RC: 27
RC: 27 (experimental, passage on bees)
LR: 25 EDITED BY MODS

Can't remember beyond 50/50 where movie rental was. I can see it on the page in my mind, but not sure which part of the test it was. I'm leaning toward my section 5.

Thanks! One of my 25s had only 4 questions (22-25) on the last two pages spread, while the other had I think 5 or 6 on the last 2 page spread. Any clue what your 25er was like, structurally?

Last question, I promise. Damn having LR as Experimental

Pretty sure the real one was the one with 5 or 6. I don't recall there being only 4 questions in the last two pages of that section. Don't hold me too this though. The test is a blur at this point.

[gaucho11]

still can't believe they put the RC Experimental section to section 4 for you. Thats definitely a first

[zdamico]

Thanks! One of my 25s had only 4 questions (22-25) on the last two pages spread, while the other had I think 5 or 6 on the last 2 page spread. Any clue what your 25er was like, structurally?

Last question, I promise. Damn having LR as Experimental

I definitely didn't have any that only had four on the back spread. Mine were either 5 or maybe 6, definitely not 4.

If you're confident, you just made someone's (mine) day. Nay, you made my next 3 weeks, haha. Thanks for all the help!

[thelawschoolproject]

If you're confident, you just made someone's (mine) day. Nay, you made my next 3 weeks, haha. Thanks for all the help!

No, I'm super confident about that. When I take the test (feel free to tease) I do the spreads that have the most questions first. And, when I counted my LR neither of them had only four questions on the back page.

[nygrrrl]

Any clue what your 25er was like, structurally?

Last question, I promise. Damn having LR as Experimental

zdamico, this would be what is called "soliciting answers." See you in a day. For everyone else, here is a refresher on the RULES.

Also, an FYI. Tomorrow will be 3 days since the test and we've been very, very clear on these rules. Therefore, tomorrow my ban time will go from 1 day to 3 days. Thank you.

This is a warning. This is likely your only warning; you are unlikely to receive any further warnings.

Please be advised that discussion or solicitation (including, but not limited to, PMs and online chatrooms) of any questions or answers from the October 2011 LSAT with anything more than an extremely broad level of specificity will result in a temporary or permanent ban. This may include a permanent ban on your IPs if necessary, which will block you from even viewing the TLS forums. Permanent IP address bans for LSAT discussion have been issued in the past.

Examples have been included for your reference below. This is not an exhaustive list. It is not a defense to say that your overly-specific discussion of an LSAT question did not exactly mirror one of the examples - you will still be banned. Linking to other online materials/discussion of the LSAT questions is also prohibited.

Please note that you agreed not to discuss specific October 2011 LSAT questions and answers when you completed your signing statement when taking the test. The LSAC considers it a violation to discuss specific October 2011 LSAT questions and answers; the LSAC will act accordingly upon discovering discussion of specific October 2011 LSAT questions and answers. Be advised that the LSAC and its agents monitor this board.

1. Games were hard. Okay.
2. Yeah, on the second question for the second game, I wasn't sure if C was just on Tuesdays or Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Ban.
3. No, the order is ACDBBE. Ban.
4. What about Question Four? If C can't go on Tuesdays, then it has to be Wednesday right? Ban.
5. You guys are stupid. The answer to Question Four and Five is D. Ban.
6. No, the answers are CDAABE. Ban.
7. C'mon guys. How can you not know all of the answers? Ban.

1. I thought the LR sections weren't too difficult. Okay.
2. What answers did you all get for the coffee growers question? Ban.
3. I got A. Ban.
4. That's weird, I thought it was either B or D. Ban.
5. But it was a parallel reasoning problem. Ban.
6. Damn it, I knew I should have picked B. Ban.
7. Hold on guys, I think the mods might get upset if we keep this up. Never a good sign.
8. Let's trick them by disguising what we're saying. So, hypothetically, if I were a coffee grower..... Ban.
9. You would be displeased with government regulation of pesticides. Ban.
10. But not price controls. Ban.
11. Is that because, hypothetically, price controls would raise prices and revenue? Ban.
12. It's just a cost problem in general. If you were a coffee grower, the legal pesticides would, hypothetically, cost more. Ban.
13. Whoa, it's just like Question 13 from the second LR section in PT 39. Ban.
14. Guys, maybe we should create a chatroom to discuss this. I started one: tinychat.com/letscheatontheLSAT Ban.
15. If you guys could PM me about this, that'd be great. Ban.

Please note that this warning applies to the Reading Comprehension section as well as the writing sample.

If you are in doubt as to whether your drafted post will run afoul of this warning, do not submit the post. You have been warned.

[3v3ryth1ng]

There are 3 scenarios I've deduced:

1) The 4th section, possibly even the 5th, can now be experimental. (most likely)

2) There are now multiple versions of the LSAT running concurrently. (scary, but seems unlikely)

3) There is a widespread hoax/conspiracy/troll job afoot, and some people are intentionally lying about their tests (possible, but also unlikely).


The easiest way to tell is to talk to people who had an RC experimental.

[qbt1990]

There are 3 scenarios I've deduced:

1) The 4th section, possibly even the 5th, can now be experimental. (most likely)

2) There are now multiple versions of the LSAT running concurrently. (scary, but seems unlikely)

3) There is a widespread hoax/conspiracy/troll job afoot, and some people are intentionally lying about their tests (possible, but also unlikely).


The easiest way to tell is to talk to people who had an RC experimental.

A combination of 1 and 2 seems the most likely scenario to me. I still think they might give us all the same questions but mixed up in different sections. It's baffling to me that we can't figure this out, but that would definitely explain it.

[3v3ryth1ng]

There are 3 scenarios I've deduced:

1) The 4th section, possibly even the 5th, can now be experimental. (most likely)

2) There are now multiple versions of the LSAT running concurrently. (scary, but seems unlikely)

3) There is a widespread hoax/conspiracy/troll job afoot, and some people are intentionally lying about their tests (possible, but also unlikely).


The easiest way to tell is to talk to people who had an RC experimental.

A combination of 1 and 2 seems the most likely scenario to me. I still think they might give us all the same questions but mixed up in different sections. It's baffling to me that we can't figure this out, but that would definitely explain it.

For the 2nd option I was referring to the possibility that different test takers had different sets of questions, i.e. one person had a scored section that I didn't have, and vice versa. I say this is possible because I've talked to some who don't remember the scored games (bikes/ambassadors), and they didn't take the test in a foreign country. This is probably just bad memory, a miscommunication, or maybe a troll job. In any case, I say this scenario is unlikely because it would be hard for LSAC to fairly score such a test, though it is possible if they constructed several different conversion scales (2 or more).

Oh, and I'd say it's pretty conclusive that this test involved a big change. The only thing I can't explain is these nay-sayers who owe you an apology, like that one who called you a bitch in the other thread.

[qbt1990]

There are 3 scenarios I've deduced:

1) The 4th section, possibly even the 5th, can now be experimental. (most likely)

2) There are now multiple versions of the LSAT running concurrently. (scary, but seems unlikely)

3) There is a widespread hoax/conspiracy/troll job afoot, and some people are intentionally lying about their tests (possible, but also unlikely).


The easiest way to tell is to talk to people who had an RC experimental.

A combination of 1 and 2 seems the most likely scenario to me. I still think they might give us all the same questions but mixed up in different sections. It's baffling to me that we can't figure this out, but that would definitely explain it.

For the 2nd option I was referring to the possibility that different test takers had different sets of questions, i.e. one person had a scored section that I didn't have, and vice versa. I say this is possible because I've talked to some who don't remember the scored games (bikes/ambassadors), and they didn't take the test in a foreign country. This is probably just bad memory, a miscommunication, or maybe a troll job. In any case, I say this scenario is unlikely because it would be hard for LSAC to fairly score such a test, though it is possible if they constructed several different conversion scales (2 or more).

Oh, and I'd say it's pretty conclusive that this test involved a big change. The only thing I can't explain is these nay-sayers who owe you an apology, like that one who called you a bitch in the other thread.

Hahahaha, thanks. I don't really care I am just so tired of wasting energy fending off the haters when we should be figuring out wtf happened! I'm seriously dreaming about it at night now I want to know so bad! I LOL'd at your other post "these people just took a logic test and yet they're making a temporal flaw.. just because it happened in the past doesn't mean it can't happen in the future." So funny/accurate!

[rich_4]

i like that idea. anyone with 2 lrs want to just say, generally of course, a question from each of their lr's?

I had killer whales, alzheimer's, hacking into an owner's computer if they're a criminal, genuine confidence, something about bio minerals, . . . will keep thinking.

Did you have movie rentals?

Yeah, I think so. And some pizza coupon thing.

This would mean my 4th section (3rd LR) was experimental. I know, I know, I'm on the side of everyone saying there can't be an experimental after the break - but if you remember all of those questions then my 4th section was experimental. I know for a fact I had movie rentals in the first LR and pizza coupons and alzheimer's in the second.

This is terrible. I'm still holding out for a 3rd section experimental.

The confusion continues.

[poultry]

.

[califlow]

I had LR(25) LG(23) LR(26) LR(25) RC(27)

In my third LR (after the break), I recall something about moderate drinking at the very beginning. Anyone else remember something about that?

(p.s. is that safe to post? i'm a newbie.)

[EMZE]

As a "25-26-25-er" I can confirm I saw that too. I actually remember it now verbatim that you say that. Was your sec 1 also very difficult compared to 3 and 4?

[nygrrrl]

Public Service Announcement:

When I screw up, I own it. In the haste of working on multiple threads at once, I misread thelawschoolproject's post. s/he is unbanned. (zdamico, however, is still on time out.)

Carry on.

[nygrrrl]

I had LR(25) LG(23) LR(26) LR(25) RC(27)

In my third LR (after the break), I recall something about moderate drinking at the very beginning. Anyone else remember something about that?

(p.s. is that safe to post? i'm a newbie.)

Yup, this is fine. Thanks for asking. Crazy rules, I know.

[qbt1990]

I had LR(25) LG(23) LR(26) LR(25) RC(27)

In my third LR (after the break), I recall something about moderate drinking at the very beginning. Anyone else remember something about that?

(p.s. is that safe to post? i'm a newbie.)

I am almost positive I did not see anything about calories and alcohol... I would've remembered that.
Had 3 LR sections.

[EMZE]

That might just be the answer to the question then, at least for me.....

[califlow]

"As a "25-26-25-er" I can confirm I saw that too. I actually remember it now verbatim that you say that. Was your sec 1 also very difficult compared to 3 and 4?"

As a "25-26-25-er", I thought Sec 1 was standard fare, Sec 3 was a nightmare, and Sec 4 was a cake walk.

Moderate drinking had nothing to do with calories- FYI. And it was def in my last (4th) LR.

Also, I had no flowers, monkey, dogs, etc...

Hope this helps.

[EMZE]

In the interest of not getting banned I comment no further than, insofar as the booze related question I had, calories was definitely relevant.

Clarity is not forthcoming. I wish I could give up looking for it on blogs.

[qbt1990]

In the interest of not getting banned I comment no further than, insofar as the booze related question I had, calories was definitely relevant.

Clarity is not forthcoming. I wish I could give up looking for it on blogs.

SAME. I just want to know the answer so I could sleep at night, haha. Nothing makes sense though and all of the questions are starting to become more jumbled in my mind

[PDaddy]

Is it 1st or 3rd? I remember the 3rd one having a very long question (near the end) that took up half a page in text...

Someday, OP's scenario could mean the 4th. Although they have yet to do it, the day will come when the experimental comes after the break.

[EMZE]

I wish it were that simple PDaddy, and I was convinced for the longest that there's no way it was after the break. But I haven't found a good deal of evidence that reliably pushes me one way or the other. There is no must be true for this situation if you consider everyones input.

[z0rk]

I had killer whales, alzheimer's, hacking into an owner's computer if they're a criminal, genuine confidence, something about bio minerals, . . . will keep thinking.

Did you have movie rentals?

Yeah, I think so. And some pizza coupon thing.

This would mean my 4th section (3rd LR) was experimental. I know, I know, I'm on the side of everyone saying there can't be an experimental after the break - but if you remember all of those questions then my 4th section was experimental. I know for a fact I had movie rentals in the first LR and pizza coupons and alzheimer's in the second.

This is terrible. I'm still holding out for a 3rd section experimental.

The confusion continues.

Based on the information you cite above I would deduct that my test (which was formatted LR - LG - LR - LR - RC) had an experimental in the 3rd section.