how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

User avatar
swtlilsoni
Posts: 399
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:00 am

how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby swtlilsoni » Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:35 am

The reason I ask is because I heard that when they calculate the curve from experiential sections, they judge based on how 170+ takers did. If a lot of high scorers missed the question they rank it as hard. So how did 170+ takers feel about this exam compared to the rest? Was it harder than PTs? Did you have more trouble? What about section by section, were there any sections that you normally beast but screwed up?

This can give us an idea of how the experimental takers did.

For me, I normally have 5-10 min remaining on every section but I barely finished on sat. I think it's because I was trying to be extra careful. Also I ran out of time on RC and made educated guesses on five questions. On LR there were two max that I narrowed down to two temping ACs and was iffy about which to choose. That doesn't happen to me that much on practice exams...but then again maybe I was just being extra careful.

User avatar
180asBreath
Posts: 480
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:47 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby 180asBreath » Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:54 am

I didn't have a 170 on my record, but I had scored 170 about half of the time in my last dozen PT's (with an average of -12).

I felt that the LG was the easiest, for me, but I don't think it was easy; I realize that it was easy for me because of the gameday boost of adrenaline and arousal. Looking back, I would say it was a deceptively tough LG; while there wasn't a game (like the dino game) that required a big inference, causing most high scorers to miss some questions - the 3rd and 4th games were quite formidable, as well as time-consuming. I've read about some 170'ers who bombed the LG because they ran out of time. I think this happened for many takers, we are just being misled by the select few who had done a ton of LG practice and benefited from the test day performance boost. But yeah, I actually feel that the LG was as challenging as past tests where I ran out of time and missed a couple.

With LR, I think there was a good amount of the evaluate type - the rarest of the LR questions; I think these may have messed people up, as we are not as used to answering these. Though, like some have said, there were a bunch of conclusion questions. I thought there was a fair amount of parallel reasoning and the usual amount of a couple of tricky questions that would take most people a couple of minutes to figure it out.

Lastly, RC was tough. I really do believe that there were a bunch of inference questions and far fewer gimme questions on tone and purpose. But I think the biggest thing is this: I prephrase before reading the answer choices. In past tests, it was a foolproof strategy; if I had a good prephrase, I'd be able to find a corresponding answer. However, for perhaps the first time, this RC had 2-5 questions where there were two AC's that were inline with my prephrase; and these were on the non-inferencey questions, which should be the gimmes. With the similarity of answer choices, I think there's a greater chance of parity - as the subtle distinction might be far more subjective than more substantive ones (fitting the prephrase vs not fitting the prephrase). So, not only were there less gimme questions - the gimme questions were more difficult than usual.

I'll just say this; seeing as the Dec curves have been -14 in the last two years, that many solid takers - who were averaging -0 on LG - had problems with LG, and that RC was challenging - I would not be surprised if it had the same curve as the past two, or even if it's an even bigger curve (-15).

I can see the possibility of a -12 or -13, as the LSAT is a cruel mistress, but there is not a chance on earth that it is a -8 to -11 as some sadomasochists have been claiming.

sportgirl234
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 12:19 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby sportgirl234 » Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:27 pm

i agree entirely. While we may have felt that the games were "insanely easy" this is a subjective group of people and the third and fourth game may have presented substantial challenges for others in the past. that being said the RC was incredibly difficult and even the com/contrast passage had multiple questions that hinged on subtle inferences. i believe we are looking at a 12 to 13 curve. a 14 sounds slightly too lenient but people calling 11 and 10, IMO, are just not taking into consideration the fact that some people struggled with the 4th game. Let's see how this all plays out but for now to freak out about a curve being under 12 would just be crazy and unrealistic.

User avatar
Mr. Pancakes
Posts: 1234
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:11 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby Mr. Pancakes » Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:47 pm

sportgirl234 wrote:i agree entirely. While we may have felt that the games were "insanely easy" this is a subjective group of people and the third and fourth game may have presented substantial challenges for others in the past. that being said the RC was incredibly difficult and even the com/contrast passage had multiple questions that hinged on subtle inferences. i believe we are looking at a 12 to 13 curve. a 14 sounds slightly too lenient but people calling 11 and 10, IMO, are just not taking into consideration the fact that some people struggled with the 4th game. Let's see how this all plays out but for now to freak out about a curve being under 12 would just be crazy and unrealistic.


+1

User avatar
180asBreath
Posts: 480
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:47 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby 180asBreath » Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:38 pm

For some strange reason, I thought that RC passage was the easiest; I had a good grasp of the passages and the questions seemed straight-forward - but we'll see.

Yeah, that LG was deceptive; I rarely miss more than 1, but on the ones that I do - they are just like Sat's LG. Easy first passages that lull you into a confident state, and then a 3rd and 4th passage that require 9-12 minutes, each, to complete.

I can only imagine that there are droves of students who got to game 3 with 17-20 minutes left and panicked.

ziegltic
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby ziegltic » Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:49 pm

180asBreath wrote:For some strange reason, I thought that RC passage was the easiest; I had a good grasp of the passages and the questions seemed straight-forward - but we'll see.

Yeah, that LG was deceptive; I rarely miss more than 1, but on the ones that I do - they are just like Sat's LG. Easy first passages that lull you into a confident state, and then a 3rd and 4th passage that require 9-12 minutes, each, to complete.

I can only imagine that there are droves of students who got to game 3 with 17-20 minutes left and panicked.


I agree with this entirely... I do not think LG was as easy as people are saying. I get -0 on logic games about 75 percent of the time and -1 about 25 percent of the time (almost always because of a careless mistake like misreading the question). I always finish with about 5-10 minutes left. I finished the first two sections in about 10 total minutes. I then triaged 3 and 4 and did the 4th game first that took me about 10 minutes. I then had about 15 minutes for the 3rd game and had to guess on the last question which means I did not finish. So I got a -0 or -1 but it took me significantly longer than usual. This makes me believe that this section was much harder than people are saying because 3 and 4 was time consuming.

baaron008
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 3:36 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby baaron008 » Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:54 pm

ziegltic wrote:
180asBreath wrote:For some strange reason, I thought that RC passage was the easiest; I had a good grasp of the passages and the questions seemed straight-forward - but we'll see.

Yeah, that LG was deceptive; I rarely miss more than 1, but on the ones that I do - they are just like Sat's LG. Easy first passages that lull you into a confident state, and then a 3rd and 4th passage that require 9-12 minutes, each, to complete.

I can only imagine that there are droves of students who got to game 3 with 17-20 minutes left and panicked.


I agree with this entirely... I do not think LG was as easy as people are saying. I get -0 on logic games about 75 percent of the time and -1 about 25 percent of the time (almost always because of a careless mistake like misreading the question). I always finish with about 5-10 minutes left. I finished the first two sections in about 10 total minutes. I then triaged 3 and 4 and did the 4th game first that took me about 10 minutes. I then had about 15 minutes for the 3rd game and had to guess on the last question which means I did not finish. So I got a -0 or -1 but it took me significantly longer than usual. This makes me believe that this section was much harder than people are saying because 3 and 4 was time consuming.



I feel the same way.

User avatar
180asBreath
Posts: 480
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:47 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby 180asBreath » Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:04 pm

Wow, there you go. I did the first 2 in 10 minutes, did the 3rd one in 8, and then had about 17 to do the last one. I finished the first one 7 minutes early, went back through a couple in the third game, double-checked my bubbling for LG, and I had a couple of minutes before it ended.

When I was doing them, I just remember feeling like, "If I hadn't gotten through those first two quickly, A) I might not have had time to complete them, B) I would have had even less time, as I would have stressed myself out - being in a time crunch". I think the only reason I was able to do 3 and 4 so quickly was that I wasn't in a time crunch.

But like you said, the 3rd one took you 15 minutes. You're a high level LG'er, can you imagine how the "I barely make it through the third game, most times!" crowd fared?

ziegltic
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby ziegltic » Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:26 pm

180asBreath wrote:Wow, there you go. I did the first 2 in 10 minutes, did the 3rd one in 8, and then had about 17 to do the last one. I finished the first one 7 minutes early, went back through a couple in the third game, double-checked my bubbling for LG, and I had a couple of minutes before it ended.

When I was doing them, I just remember feeling like, "If I hadn't gotten through those first two quickly, A) I might not have had time to complete them, B) I would have had even less time, as I would have stressed myself out - being in a time crunch". I think the only reason I was able to do 3 and 4 so quickly was that I wasn't in a time crunch.

But like you said, the 3rd one took you 15 minutes. You're a high level LG'er, can you imagine how the "I barely make it through the third game, most times!" crowd fared?


Exactly.... I prep around 172ish, and I felt like this test was pretty difficult. Coupled with the fact that December is notorious for having monster curves, I think it will be a -13 or -14 curve. The december 2010 curve was -14 and I thought this test was much more difficult.

User avatar
180asBreath
Posts: 480
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:47 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby 180asBreath » Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:46 pm

As did I. I thought that December 10 was one of the easiest I had done, and I only missed 10 (3, of which, were complete guesses).

This being said, the curve is no big deal; all that matters is that we missed the 10-13 that we normally do, so the curve won't make or break us.

User avatar
swtlilsoni
Posts: 399
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:00 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby swtlilsoni » Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:55 pm

180asBreath wrote:As did I. I thought that December 10 was one of the easiest I had done, and I only missed 10 (3, of which, were complete guesses).

This being said, the curve is no big deal; all that matters is that we missed the 10-13 that we normally do, so the curve won't make or break us.


How would the curve not make or break you? It can change your score from a 168 to 171!

User avatar
180asBreath
Posts: 480
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:47 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby 180asBreath » Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:58 pm

This is coming from someone with paranoid thoughts about having scored a 160 :-/

User avatar
swtlilsoni
Posts: 399
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:00 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby swtlilsoni » Tue Dec 06, 2011 4:04 pm

180asBreath wrote:This is coming from someone with paranoid thoughts about having scored a 160 :-/


Ohh I don't think it would be that bad! As long as you didn't have a panic attack I'm sure you scored within 5 pts of your pt average. You would have had to get over 20 wrong to get a 160 and if you usually get max 13 wrong that's highly unlikely.

bullfrog
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 12:31 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby bullfrog » Tue Dec 06, 2011 7:13 pm

.
Last edited by bullfrog on Tue Dec 06, 2011 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

shasty
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby shasty » Tue Dec 06, 2011 7:52 pm

bullfrog wrote:LG was not easy. Many of those people who are going on and on about how easy it was (the ones that got "only 1 or 2 wrong" on the 4th game) propably didn't diagram the 4th game properly and that's why it seemed so easy. I think the LG was harder than in Oct. That being said, I think the LR was easier, but the RC was indeed pretty challenging. I would call this test more difficult than Oct, which I also wrote.
This is my input as 170 plus test-taker.


...could it possibly be that you didn't diagram it properly and thus was hard for you?
The 4th game was a standard game that was worded differently to confuse people. Like I said on a different thread, the fourth game was the exact same format, except with fewer slots (and thus simpler), as those interview/interrogate games with days divided into mornings/afternoons.

inflightradio
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 5:00 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby inflightradio » Tue Dec 06, 2011 8:17 pm

swtlilsoni wrote:The reason I ask is because I heard that when they calculate the curve from experiential sections, they judge based on how 170+ takers did. If a lot of high scorers missed the question they rank it as hard. So how did 170+ takers feel about this exam compared to the rest? Was it harder than PTs? Did you have more trouble? What about section by section, were there any sections that you normally beast but screwed up?

This can give us an idea of how the experimental takers did.

For me, I normally have 5-10 min remaining on every section but I barely finished on sat. I think it's because I was trying to be extra careful. Also I ran out of time on RC and made educated guesses on five questions. On LR there were two max that I narrowed down to two temping ACs and was iffy about which to choose. That doesn't happen to me that much on practice exams...but then again maybe I was just being extra careful.


I feel the same way. I generally PT in the low 170's but I have a history of anxiety before any big event. But during PTs on my own, I generally have at least 5 minutes to kill on both LR and LG. This was definitely not the case on Saturday. Generally, I think this was a deceptively harder test because it completely lacked predictability. Components of every section seemed slightly off at first and less formulaic than usual. In particular, the LG were fairly simple but super time consuming. Because of this, I feel like a lot of people (like myself) were thrown off since we are used to making more inferences and working out problems less. The RC was definitely a killer, I thought it was just me but it seems many people were in the same boat with two fairly difficult passages at the very end. Time management seemed to be the big test here. Finally, the LR was average but also strange because there were many question types that we aren't used to seeing often on a test. Overall, this was just a strange test!

User avatar
bigtexmex
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:42 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby bigtexmex » Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:43 pm

I felt weird about the LR sections. Don't know why. I'm sure I did fine.

The LG section was strange. Even some of the harder games (dinos), I could finish in about 5-6 minutes. However, the last two took me about 10 each. I barely managed to finish the very last question on the final game, as that one took me a bit to complete. Don't know why because, in retrospect, it shouldn't have taken me so long for the last two.

The RC was okay, I guess. The last two passages gave me some problems, but I still managed to find the responses in the passages. So, hopefully, everything turns out fine.

I'm confident of at least breaking 165. I was PTing at 168-172 the last few times. So, hopefully, everything turns out fine.

User avatar
lsacqueen
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:03 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby lsacqueen » Wed Dec 07, 2011 4:11 pm

y'all are making me nervous.


best,
170+ PTer

User avatar
iMisto
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby iMisto » Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:36 pm

I'm sweating bullets!

I've been consistently scoring between 170-174 on my PTs, and this RC threw me WAY off. Also had a tough time finishing the LG section.

My dilemma is: do I register for the Feb. test NOW, or wait until I get my score back? I won't be happy with anything below a 169 - need to get into Cornell or higher.
Last edited by iMisto on Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Glaucon
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 5:24 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby Glaucon » Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:42 pm

I registered for the feb LSAT the day of finishing the dec one :P

inflightradio
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 5:00 am

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby inflightradio » Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:49 pm

iMisto wrote:I'm sweating bullets!

I've been consistently scoring between 170-174 on my PTs, and this RC threw me WAY off. Also had a tough time finishing the LG section.

My dilemma is: do I register for the Feb. test NOW, or wait until I get my score back? I won't be happy with anything below a 169 - need to get into Cornell or higher.


I suggest registering now if there's one location that everyone wants (i.e. the place with long desks, good seats, free parking, etc.) You can always withdraw your registration after you get your test back (you'll lose some money, but I think the better location is worth it).

User avatar
3v3ryth1ng
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:48 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby 3v3ryth1ng » Thu Dec 08, 2011 1:44 am

I usually scored between 165 and 174 on my PTs. Most of the time when I missed questions it was because I couldn't finish the 4th logic game.

1) The fact that December has had, on average, more "lenient" curves means nothing.

2) The games (LG) were very easy; not as easy as June '11, but nothing exceptionally difficult or surprising. The only thing slightly unusual was the phrasing of the rules in 4th game, and even then, the 4th game was an extremely common type of game, with an extremely finite amount of scenarios. Don't get too happy about a couple people here saying they were hard, because they just weren't. Again, games are my weakest section, so I would probably be the first to complain about a difficult game. I doubt this section does much to stretch the curve.

3) LR is hard to comment on, but from what I saw, it was more difficult than average. They definitely weren't easier than usual, and I'd put money on that. I usually finish PTs with about 5 min left, or I spend 10 min on the last 3 problems. On the actual test, I ran out of time and had to guess on both LRs though. This may be due to anxiety causing me to slow down, but I am pretty sure there were quite a few "easy" problems that weren't actually that easy, on both sections. The 2nd section had harder/confusing questions, but the amount of reading was less, so I expect more people got through it. I also don't think this will really affect the curve too much. Maybe 1 point.

4) The RC passages were harder than average, but the questions were very straightforward. I don't recall any truly tough questions, not even on that last passage. Nevertheless, I'm willing to bet many people didn't get to the last passage as the first 3 were so dense. I see this section affecting the curve 1 or 2 points.

5) -11 is not out of the question, but -12 is more likely, IMO. -13 would be a great Christmas present. It was not -14, and it was not -10.

baaron008
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 3:36 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby baaron008 » Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:09 am

3v3ryth1ng wrote:I usually scored between 165 and 174 on my PTs. Most of the time when I missed questions it was because I couldn't finish the 4th logic game.

1) The fact that December has had, on average, more "lenient" curves means nothing.

2) The games (LG) were very easy; not as easy as June '11, but nothing exceptionally difficult or surprising. The only thing slightly unusual was the phrasing of the rules in 4th game, and even then, the 4th game was an extremely common type of game, with an extremely finite amount of scenarios. Don't get too happy about a couple people here saying they were hard, because they just weren't. Again, games are my weakest section, so I would probably be the first to complain about a difficult game. I doubt this section does much to stretch the curve.

3) LR is hard to comment on, but from what I saw, it was more difficult than average. They definitely weren't easier than usual, and I'd put money on that. I usually finish PTs with about 5 min left, or I spend 10 min on the last 3 problems. On the actual test, I ran out of time and had to guess on both LRs though. This may be due to anxiety causing me to slow down, but I am pretty sure there were quite a few "easy" problems that weren't actually that easy, on both sections. The 2nd section had harder/confusing questions, but the amount of reading was less, so I expect more people got through it. I also don't think this will really affect the curve too much. Maybe 1 point.

4) The RC passages were harder than average, but the questions were very straightforward. I don't recall any truly tough questions, not even on that last passage. Nevertheless, I'm willing to bet many people didn't get to the last passage as the first 3 were so dense. I see this section affecting the curve 1 or 2 points.

5) -11 is not out of the question, but -12 is more likely, IMO. -13 would be a great Christmas present. It was not -14, and it was not -10.


I have to agree with what you have stated. Although I do remember a formal logic question at the end of the second LR section that probably tripped most test takers up. I think the RC was definitely the hardest section and will contribute most to the equated distribution. I usually PT in the mid to low 170s and this exam did not seem to be the most difficult I've ever taken, but it was by no means the easiest. I think, therefore, that the curve will be -11.

barneytrouble
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 11:43 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby barneytrouble » Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:19 am

3v3ryth1ng wrote:I usually scored between 165 and 174 on my PTs. Most of the time when I missed questions it was because I couldn't finish the 4th logic game.

1) The fact that December has had, on average, more "lenient" curves means nothing.

2) The games (LG) were very easy; not as easy as June '11, but nothing exceptionally difficult or surprising. The only thing slightly unusual was the phrasing of the rules in 4th game, and even then, the 4th game was an extremely common type of game, with an extremely finite amount of scenarios. Don't get too happy about a couple people here saying they were hard, because they just weren't. Again, games are my weakest section, so I would probably be the first to complain about a difficult game. I doubt this section does much to stretch the curve.

3) LR is hard to comment on, but from what I saw, it was more difficult than average. They definitely weren't easier than usual, and I'd put money on that. I usually finish PTs with about 5 min left, or I spend 10 min on the last 3 problems. On the actual test, I ran out of time and had to guess on both LRs though. This may be due to anxiety causing me to slow down, but I am pretty sure there were quite a few "easy" problems that weren't actually that easy, on both sections. The 2nd section had harder/confusing questions, but the amount of reading was less, so I expect more people got through it. I also don't think this will really affect the curve too much. Maybe 1 point.

4) The RC passages were harder than average, but the questions were very straightforward. I don't recall any truly tough questions, not even on that last passage. Nevertheless, I'm willing to bet many people didn't get to the last passage as the first 3 were so dense. I see this section affecting the curve 1 or 2 points.

5) -11 is not out of the question, but -12 is more likely, IMO. -13 would be a great Christmas present. It was not -14, and it was not -10.

background: 170 was my lowest PT, avg 174

1. agreed

2. look i routinely go -0 on games. I think I missed 2 LG questions in my entire prep... which was like 15 tests so lets call it 350 LG questions. The last 2 games were not hard in and of themselves, but game 3 was time consuming, and game 4 had 7 questions as well as a slightly tricky setup. As far as entire LG sections go this one was certainly not easy because you need to factor in how long it takes. Like, a sequencing game with 20 rules could easily be more difficult than a game like mauve dinos. I usually know when I miss 0 on an LG section because I have plenty of time to go back and check every answer. I only had time to do that on 4 of the 7 for this game, so the other 3 are up in the air. So while the game was VERY easy in a vacuum, the length and awkward rule made this a tough way for finishing up an LG section.

Considering that this forum has a higher than proportionate amount of people who mastered the LG going into the test and the amount of flack this LG section is getting, I can't see how it didn't affect the curve.

3. The LR I felt was particularly easy but LR is a section that plays to some peoples strengths more than others. Parallel questions give me the worst trouble, and thankfully there were no long tricky parallel Qs. Same with formal logic; the only one I remember was the last Q in one of the sections and it was relatively straightforward. OTOH if someone struggles with assumption questions, this LR would have been brutal.

4. RC was a killer. Political parties and newspapers, i mean wtf lol!?

spinsrap
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:51 pm

Re: how did 170+ takers feel about dec 11?

Postby spinsrap » Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:13 am

sportgirl234 wrote:i agree entirely. While we may have felt that the games were "insanely easy" this is a subjective group of people and the third and fourth game may have presented substantial challenges for others in the past. that being said the RC was incredibly difficult and even the com/contrast passage had multiple questions that hinged on subtle inferences. i believe we are looking at a 12 to 13 curve. a 14 sounds slightly too lenient but people calling 11 and 10, IMO, are just not taking into consideration the fact that some people struggled with the 4th game. Let's see how this all plays out but for now to freak out about a curve being under 12 would just be crazy and unrealistic.


Yup, that RC sucked. I had LR LG LR LR RC and was fairly certain that I was crushing it all the way through the second passage. I had 20 min left, got fancy, and skipped the parallel passage before spending 15 minutes on #4. Then I sat and panicked for five minutes and left myself with just some educated guesses on maybe four.

I feel like this was much akin to when I bowl two strikes and just want to see that turkey so badly that I chuck it straight into the gutter. If RC came earlier, I probably would have missed a question or two on the whole damn test. Curses! Fingers crossed for some lucky guesses.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw and 6 guests