December 2002 LSAT, LG #2 (pg. 155 in PWS LG WB)

Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 2:53 pm

December 2002 LSAT, LG #2 (pg. 155 in PWS LG WB)

Postby Oscar85 » Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:39 am

What the hell is this game saying? I'm generally very good at grouping games, but I am not able to understand the language of this one. I was starting to feel pretty confident about LG, but this brought down my morale. I didn't know how to diagram it... at first I wanted to do a multi-variable game, and then I thought of grouping but I was unable to conceptualize the diagram... It would have taken me a long time to figure out the set up, and this game actually ate up a lot of my time considering I was able to finish the first one in five minutes, and the third and fourth one in 8 minutes...

I was able to get a LG of -5 because I got two questions on this game... but I don't want my inability to understand the language of a game to be the reason that I miss five questons on the LG. Is there a good resource to get you to "look" at games and determine what you need to do??

User avatar
Posts: 4025
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: December 2002 LSAT, LG #2 (pg. 155 in PWS LG WB)

Postby North » Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:38 pm

This was a weird one to diagram, but one you get past that it's a pretty easy game. Here's how I set it up using the given information and the rules:

Granted, it's not the most efficient diagram I've ever made. Using it, though, I was able to complete the game in 9:47, and 8:19 with -0 the two times I've done it. Is this anywhere close to what you came up with?

User avatar
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:16 pm

Re: December 2002 LSAT, LG #2 (pg. 155 in PWS LG WB)

Postby mindarmed » Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:41 pm

PT 39 is an awful, awful games section. Allow me to shed some light on the questions for you.

So the first thing I like to do whenever I look at an LG stimulus is identify any variables that are discussed. In this question, we have three employees: M, S, T. We have three days: 1, 2, 3 and eighteen total sessions (six on each day).

Let's now examine the rules to construct our diagram:
We are given that each participant attends two sessions on two different topics. The second rule tells us that M and S cannot attend I, thus, we know two of the unattended sessions will be I. Lastly, we are told that T does not attend any sessions on the third day. This creates the inference that I on the third day MUST be unattended.

From this data, we create a diagram that has 6 slots on each day and looks something like this


_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1 2 3

The above diagram is the hypothetical diagram I created to assist me with the questions.
I really think the biggest concept here is to understand that three sessions will be unattended by the participants. If you struggle with unbalanced games, I would suggest adding in some U variables to represent the unattended sessions. (Second I spot on Day 1/2, Both I spots Day 3).

Onto the questions:

The first question is fairly straightforward. You have six variables, so naturally six sessions is the maximum amount of sessions able to be attended by the participants.
Answer choice: D

The second question is also pretty straightforward after we've made our inference that I cannot be attended by any participant on the 3rd day.
Answer choice: E

The third question is also fairly basic. If we have two sessions on the third day attended by two or more participants, we know M and S must be on the third in either H or R. Additionally, we also know that T must be in the I slot on either day 1 or day 2. From this information, we can determine that M and S cannot any other session together because of their inability to attend I.
Answer choice: C

The fourth question is another quick inference. M or S are both unable to attend I. Thus, each I session is unable to be attended by two participants.
Answer choice: B

The fifth question is the most difficult out of the set of questions, but, is quickly solved by taking a couple seconds to think about the possibilities. So we're given the information that each session is attended by at least one employee of Capital. We know that there can't be any double sessions because participants must attend different sessions on different days. We also know that M or S can either occupy the H or R slot. From this information, we are able to conclude that M and S are unable to attend a session together on the third day because one of the participants would have attended the session previously, thereby violating a rule of the game.
Answer choice: A

The sixth question is very simple as well, if M and T are the only participants to attend a session on the first day, then it is not possible for M and S two attend two sessions with each other.
Answer choice: A

If you have any further question about this game or any other game, don't hesitate to shoot me a PM.
*Cheap plug* I'm also running an online study group through Manhattan LSAT for the October test. The group meets at 9 PM EST on Wednesday evenings, if you would like to be involved with it, I can get you the details.

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: curry1, tskela, Yahoo [Bot] and 8 guests