willwash wrote:LSAT Blog wrote:GirlStop wrote:willwash wrote:PT 61 on 11/6= 161
PT 64 on 11/9= 168
Good job man!!!
And @nailsat, Ive heard really good things about that book, I bought the kaplan mastery practice book and it divides the logical reasoning section by question type and difficulty. It also has logic games and reading comp sections tho..
Congrats, willwash - that's a huge leap! What do you think led to the increase?
@nailsat - it's important that you identify what exactly is giving you difficulty in LR. Is it a particular question-type, or is it a wide variety of question-types? Either way, it's crucial to have a strategy for each question-type ingrained before you start drilling a bunch of questions, or else you won't be maximizing the benefit of all that studying.
To be honest, I think it's just knocking the rust off, plus a little luck. I was preparing diligently for the LSAT and had gotten my PTs up to about the high 160s average during my undergrad, but (see above post) I haven't focused much on law school as a goal for several years, so that 161 was almost like an initial diagnostic (my "real" first ever, initial diagnostic test was a 155 as a freshman in college), which, of course, I reviewed ad nauseum.
My weakest section is LG, as seems to be the case for most of us. If I miss more than 2 or 3 per LR or RC I start getting pretty pissed. I average -4 to -6 on games, however. I actually take this as a good thing. I'd rather be weak on games and strong in the sections where two answers can be objectively correct. I'm a former competitive minesweeper and sudoku player, so I really thrive on solving logical puzzles swiftly, but where that bites you in the ass is that, in both minesweeper and sudoku, once you "crack" how the game works, it's just a matter of repetition. I actually play my best minesweeper when I've got MP3s blaring and my mind is drifting to subjects like sex, the meaning of life, and the role of slavery in formulating Thomas Jefferson's perspective on human liberty. It's literally played in the sub-cortex area of my brain. LSAT LGs are not like that. Every single game has a new way to keep you on your toes. You can never "autopilot" a great LG, or if you can, I have yet to reach that point.
Got a real kick out of this. (Potential sentence for inclusion in your personal statement?)
Although no two LGs are completely identical, many are remarkably similar to each other, and there are certain techniques that will apply to many different games. Once you start seeing these similarities, you'll be much closer to mastering this section.