So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Shasha Dew Dew
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 9:19 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby Shasha Dew Dew » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:00 pm

Deleted
Last edited by Shasha Dew Dew on Sun Jan 12, 2014 1:09 am, edited 2 times in total.

MLBrandow
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby MLBrandow » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:01 pm

If I were to rate the difficulty versus the average in the 60-65, I'd go as follows:

My LR1..[===[]=======]
My LGx..[========[]==]
RC........[===[]=======]
My LR2..[=====[]=====]
LG........[=====[]=====]

The biggest change was the two-page per game change. I had an initial games section like this, figured it was experimental, and it made me more confident about it. I later found out in section 5 that that was in fact an experimental, but otherwise seemed okay.

To be honest, I'm worried that the curve is going to be small (-9 or -10) because that test seemed too easy.

It was definitely the easiest RC I've seen in a while, and I actually had time leftover (wow!). I could have missed as many as five, but RC for me was all about damage mitigation.

I had a minor freakout on the first two LR questions, but ultimately did them last and finished with like 8 minutes remaining once I got in the zone. I had time to double check every section, never found an LR question that truly stumped me, and I feel that any mistakes I made are the result of my own carelessness.

No question seemed unreasonable, and although I feel less confident than usual about the games, I think it was more a result of seeing them as my last section (and knowing they were real) rather than anything else. I rushed through them more quickly than normal (with about 10 minutes leftover) and in double checking I found four mistakes.

I had time to go to the bathroom twice during the test which was nice to just walk around outside.

One of the RC passages was very peculiar, and led me to believe that it was experimental, although I won't comment further because I'm not sure what exactly is permissible or not. I think this helped me though, because it relaxed me during the RC.


Overall, I was grinning by the end of it, but as I looked around my test center, most of the other test-takers had deer-in-headlights looks, so perhaps my sense of victory will be short-lived.

I feel like -10 170 would be a worst-case scenario for me, and since breaking 170 was my goal, I'm feeling pretty good. I'm hopeful I'll score better than that, but I know that I definitely earned whatever score I get, because no question was unreasonable on that test, and no passage or game was super weird.

One of the experimental sequencing games was pretty challenging, but it was experimental, so I guess I can't comment on it other than to say I had to scratch my head for a bit.

I hope everyone takes at least two weeks away from LSAT, law school admissions, and everything else... and just relaxes. All this hard work has either paid off or it hasn't, but you can't change or know until you get your score... so ENJOY a vacation!
Last edited by MLBrandow on Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby bp shinners » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:05 pm

MLBrandow wrote:I hope everyone takes at least two weeks away from LSAT, law school admissions, and everything else... and just relaxes. All this hard work has either paid off or it hasn't, but you can't change or know until you get your score... so ENJOY a vacation!


Seconded. Even if you plan to retake, take this advice.
Last edited by bp shinners on Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby flem » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:05 pm

2 logic game pages? wat?

User avatar
TheThriller
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:12 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby TheThriller » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:08 pm

Think like RC but with 1/4 of the top of the page questions and 3/4s blank work space. I liked it but it threw me off.

MLBrandow
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby MLBrandow » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:08 pm

flem wrote:2 logic game pages? wat?


Yeah I opened the first games section and was like :shock: OMG I must have some kind of mistake.

But yeah, 2/3 of each page in LG (now 8 pages instead of 4) were entirely blank for scribbling. I felt like I was a VIP with premium scribble real estate.

User avatar
shifty_eyed
Posts: 1934
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:09 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby shifty_eyed » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:09 pm

MLBrandow wrote:
flem wrote:2 logic game pages? wat?


Yeah I opened the first games section and was like :shock: OMG I must have some kind of mistake.

But yeah, 2/3 of each page in LG (now 8 pages instead of 4) were entirely blank for scribbling. I felt like I was a VIP with premium scribble real estate.


I had so much extra space. I didn't even think any of the games needed that much room!!

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby flem » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:13 pm

Bro that's bad ass

MLBrandow
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby MLBrandow » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:13 pm

Did anyone have a bus game and go

Image

All I could think of was the seats on a bus game the entire time.

VasaVasori
Posts: 573
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:36 pm

.

Postby VasaVasori » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:13 pm

.
Last edited by VasaVasori on Sat May 02, 2015 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Rehmsmeyer
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 6:08 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby Rehmsmeyer » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:20 pm

LG was super stereotypical and, for me, super easy. I believe it was the best I have ever done and probably got 1-3 wrong max. There was a 2nd LG (and CRAZY DIFFICULT) for me that had to be the experimental section. The questions were not that different from what you normally see, but the given information seemed MUCH less helpful and it was like there was a much wider gap of information to be filled in. As for RC/LR, I have done 90% of the available tests and would put this at the top of most difficult. The first 10 for me in LR are always very obvious and at most I might miss 1, this time I felt like I was struggling from the get-go. I always suck at RC, but it didn't see much different, just harder to get through.

VasaVasori
Posts: 573
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:36 pm

.

Postby VasaVasori » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:33 pm

.
Last edited by VasaVasori on Sat May 02, 2015 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
nigeriansiberian
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:07 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby nigeriansiberian » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:35 pm

Does anyone know which LR was experimental. My sections were ordered as RC LR LR LG LR. Was the last LR experimental or one of the first 2?

VasaVasori
Posts: 573
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:36 pm

.

Postby VasaVasori » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:37 pm

.
Last edited by VasaVasori on Sat May 02, 2015 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1745
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:38 pm

Wow I agree wholeheartedly that DID NOT feel like a normal LSAT. I don't know what it was, maybe how the booklet was different and the crap ass paper the questions were printed or what, but it was definitely a diff feel. Felt like R/C went well and L/R and L/G were just weird. But the amt of space was crazyness for the L/G lol and yet it was my weakest section. Ah well, we'll see whats up in July. Wonder which L/R was the experimental....And THE NERVE of LSAC of having our games section be the last one loll
Last edited by CardozoLaw09 on Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

tlink1990
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:19 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby tlink1990 » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:38 pm

VasaVasori wrote:
Rehmsmeyer wrote:LG was super stereotypical and, for me, super easy. I believe it was the best I have ever done and probably got 1-3 wrong max. There was a 2nd LG (and CRAZY DIFFICULT) for me that had to be the experimental section. The questions were not that different from what you normally see, but the given information seemed MUCH less helpful and it was like there was a much wider gap of information to be filled in. As for RC/LR, I have done 90% of the available tests and would put this at the top of most difficult. The first 10 for me in LR are always very obvious and at most I might miss 1, this time I felt like I was struggling from the get-go. I always suck at RC, but it didn't see much different, just harder to get through.

Pretty sure the second LG was real if you had LR-LG-RC-LR-LG.

Idk tho. I feel like the number of questions would be off if the second one was real.

User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby Nova » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:40 pm

VasaVasori wrote:
Nova wrote:
agcl0913 wrote:
theprophet89 wrote:5 year anniversary since Comparative Reading iirc. Any new twists?


Yes - each LG got two pages. So much space to use I was overwhelmed. And confused when I opened the section.


are you kidding? wtf?

You didn't have two pages per game? I was wondering this too, because I thought for sure that the first LG was experimental because of this. But both of them had two pages per game.


I didnt take this LSAT. I took Dec '11. Just thought it was wierd. Sorry for the ambiguity.

bdm261
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:19 am

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby bdm261 » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:42 pm

I had LR, LR, RC, LR, LG. The three LR sections almost in a row made me burned out by time I got to LG. I think my first LR section was the experimental, some weird questions I haven't seen anything similar to on recent PTs.
Last edited by bdm261 on Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Shasha Dew Dew
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 9:19 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby Shasha Dew Dew » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:43 pm

Deleted
Last edited by Shasha Dew Dew on Sun Jan 12, 2014 1:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
TheThriller
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:12 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby TheThriller » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:44 pm

More likely LR2?

Rehmsmeyer
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 6:08 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby Rehmsmeyer » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:49 pm

VasaVasori wrote:
Rehmsmeyer wrote:LG was super stereotypical and, for me, super easy. I believe it was the best I have ever done and probably got 1-3 wrong max. There was a 2nd LG (and CRAZY DIFFICULT) for me that had to be the experimental section. The questions were not that different from what you normally see, but the given information seemed MUCH less helpful and it was like there was a much wider gap of information to be filled in. As for RC/LR, I have done 90% of the available tests and would put this at the top of most difficult. The first 10 for me in LR are always very obvious and at most I might miss 1, this time I felt like I was struggling from the get-go. I always suck at RC, but it didn't see much different, just harder to get through.

Pretty sure the second LG was real if you had LR-LG-RC-LR-LG.


I understand what a lot of people's logic here is. I heard some people saying that the experimental section is typically in the first 3. I thought to my self, yeah, that's because statistically it has a greater chance to be -_- (60% vs 40%) However, there is absolutely no way. Out of the 30-40 tests I've taken, the first LG was just like all of the others and the second was the definition of "experimental".

VasaVasori
Posts: 573
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:36 pm

.

Postby VasaVasori » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:55 pm

.
Last edited by VasaVasori on Sat May 02, 2015 10:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4165
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby Clearly » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:56 pm

Rehmsmeyer wrote:
VasaVasori wrote:
Rehmsmeyer wrote:LG was super stereotypical and, for me, super easy. I believe it was the best I have ever done and probably got 1-3 wrong max. There was a 2nd LG (and CRAZY DIFFICULT) for me that had to be the experimental section. The questions were not that different from what you normally see, but the given information seemed MUCH less helpful and it was like there was a much wider gap of information to be filled in. As for RC/LR, I have done 90% of the available tests and would put this at the top of most difficult. The first 10 for me in LR are always very obvious and at most I might miss 1, this time I felt like I was struggling from the get-go. I always suck at RC, but it didn't see much different, just harder to get through.

Pretty sure the second LG was real if you had LR-LG-RC-LR-LG.


I understand what a lot of people's logic here is. I heard some people saying that the experimental section is typically in the first 3. I thought to my self, yeah, that's because statistically it has a greater chance to be -_- (60% vs 40%) However, there is absolutely no way. Out of the 30-40 tests I've taken, the first LG was just like all of the others and the second was the definition of "experimental".


In all the years of lsat, only once has the exp shown up outside of the first 3 sections. From what I gather, that hasn't yet happened this test.

I'm not sure that experimentals are issued in the same order to testers with otherwise identical sections, as in my first two sections were RC, and the first was exp, but that doesn't mean others who had RC-RC also had the exp first...

User avatar
Wily
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:35 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby Wily » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:57 pm

This is my 3rd take in a year (took in Oct and Dec 2011), and I thought this was EASIER than my previous two tests. I didn't study much before any of them, but I managed to get through the games section today without running out of time, which is a rarity for me.

For those for whom this was the first taking ever, you might be just feeling overwhelmed from the experience and probably did better than you thought.

Anyone else take the Oct or Dec 2011 tests and feel this one was easier?

Harlyn
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:06 pm

Re: So How Was It? Hard? Harder? Just what you expected?

Postby Harlyn » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:57 pm

Rehmsmeyer wrote:
VasaVasori wrote:
Rehmsmeyer wrote:LG was super stereotypical and, for me, super easy. I believe it was the best I have ever done and probably got 1-3 wrong max. There was a 2nd LG (and CRAZY DIFFICULT) for me that had to be the experimental section. The questions were not that different from what you normally see, but the given information seemed MUCH less helpful and it was like there was a much wider gap of information to be filled in. As for RC/LR, I have done 90% of the available tests and would put this at the top of most difficult. The first 10 for me in LR are always very obvious and at most I might miss 1, this time I felt like I was struggling from the get-go. I always suck at RC, but it didn't see much different, just harder to get through.

Pretty sure the second LG was real if you had LR-LG-RC-LR-LG.


I understand what a lot of people's logic here is. I heard some people saying that the experimental section is typically in the first 3. I thought to my self, yeah, that's because statistically it has a greater chance to be -_- (60% vs 40%) However, there is absolutely no way. Out of the 30-40 tests I've taken, the first LG was just like all of the others and the second was the definition of "experimental".

Individuals who took the test and had only one LG have confirmed that the first LG was experimental.
Last edited by Harlyn on Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”