How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Artinka
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 7:23 pm

How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby Artinka » Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:59 pm

Hi, I would just like to ask -- how much time improvement can be expected in general on logic games after reading Powerscore LG Bible and doing about 10 sections of logic games?

Currently, I average about 12-13 minutes per game. How much improvement can I realistically expect (I plan to do about 40 PTs)?

Thanks for any advice!

//Sorry if there is a similar thread -- I was able to find only threads describing improvement from initial diagnostic test.//

User avatar
TripTrip
Posts: 2738
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:52 am

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby TripTrip » Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:31 am

Artinka wrote:(I plan to do about 40 PTs)

You can expect be average under 8:45. The games are designed so that it is difficult to complete them in the allotted time, but not impossible. With proper preparation and understanding of technique, there is no reason anyone cannot complete them in the proper timeframe.

One thing to note is that while training, try to do as few as possible without a time limit. Once you get the hang of diagramming and inferences, start learning to do them quickly. When I first started LG training, I mistakenly stayed off the clock for quite a while. This hurt my PT time because I was so used to drawing elaborate diagrams when simple ones that required less time to draw but still provided the same information were just as possible.

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

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby bp shinners » Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:15 pm

You can definitely get your time down under the 8:45 you have, on average, per game. I have students who go from 20+minutes/game to 6-7 minutes/game, so shaving 4-5 minutes off your time is definitely possible.

I find that most people waste time by spinning their wheels. This is when you're doing work, but it's not work that's getting you any closer to a correct answer. Students are either writing out a TON of possibilities, proving stuff that doesn't need to be proven, or trying to find deductions that don't exist (or aren't important).

To avoid this, have a set process that you follow every time. And don't stray from it. Having it written out helps a lot, too. I even have a step-by-step guide (VERY LONG) that I send to students that, I believe, hits every step I use when doing a Logic Game. The first few times you follow it, don't time yourself. Just get into the rhythm of the method. Once you have it down so you don't have to think about following it (and only doing the steps on that list), start timing yourself. Just cutting out all the useless stuff you are probably doing is going to save several minutes.

M.M.
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:16 pm

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby M.M. » Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:42 pm

bp shinners wrote:You can definitely get your time down under the 8:45 you have, on average, per game. I have students who go from 20+minutes/game to 6-7 minutes/game, so shaving 4-5 minutes off your time is definitely possible.

I find that most people waste time by spinning their wheels. This is when you're doing work, but it's not work that's getting you any closer to a correct answer. Students are either writing out a TON of possibilities, proving stuff that doesn't need to be proven, or trying to find deductions that don't exist (or aren't important).

To avoid this, have a set process that you follow every time. And don't stray from it. Having it written out helps a lot, too. I even have a step-by-step guide (VERY LONG) that I send to students that, I believe, hits every step I use when doing a Logic Game. The first few times you follow it, don't time yourself. Just get into the rhythm of the method. Once you have it down so you don't have to think about following it (and only doing the steps on that list), start timing yourself. Just cutting out all the useless stuff you are probably doing is going to save several minutes.


Would you mind sending me that list? If its only for BP students, no worries.

@ OP: the consensus seems to be around here that if you've done enough you'll Get it eventually. iveseen people claim they went from -10 to -0 / -1 in a week or two. Im on the opposite end of the spectrum. I've literally done over 300 games / iterations of games and I'm still not great at them. There's a lot of variation.

User avatar
carboncopyx
Posts: 671
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 10:30 am

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby carboncopyx » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:45 pm

Initially, I would spend 12-15 minutes/game. After doing a lot of them, though, I average 6-7 min/game. Definitely one of the areas that huge gains can be made. My first untimed LG section took me 52 minutes, and now I finish with at least 5 minutes to spare.

User avatar
mvonh001
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:49 pm

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby mvonh001 » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:53 pm

bp shinners wrote:You can definitely get your time down under the 8:45 you have, on average, per game. I have students who go from 20+minutes/game to 6-7 minutes/game, so shaving 4-5 minutes off your time is definitely possible.

I find that most people waste time by spinning their wheels. This is when you're doing work, but it's not work that's getting you any closer to a correct answer. Students are either writing out a TON of possibilities, proving stuff that doesn't need to be proven, or trying to find deductions that don't exist (or aren't important).

To avoid this, have a set process that you follow every time. And don't stray from it. Having it written out helps a lot, too. I even have a step-by-step guide (VERY LONG) that I send to students that, I believe, hits every step I use when doing a Logic Game. The first few times you follow it, don't time yourself. Just get into the rhythm of the method. Once you have it down so you don't have to think about following it (and only doing the steps on that list), start timing yourself. Just cutting out all the useless stuff you are probably doing is going to save several minutes.


any chance i can get that also? if not, no worries.

Artinka
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 7:23 pm

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby Artinka » Tue Oct 30, 2012 3:30 pm

Thanks a lot for answers! They were very helpful. It is motivating to see that even though I am by far not at the time I want to be, it is possible to get there.

@shinners -- is the guide somewhere available (even for purchase) or could you share it?

cgood
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby cgood » Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:10 pm

Haven't read all the responses so I apologize if it's already been brought up.
But in my experiences, with enough practice you will start to improve at certain types of games and should be able to destroy those ones quickly. with high accuracy. For myself, I learned I could quickly get through linear games, especially sequential games, which would take me less than 5 minutes with perfect accuracy. But grouping games gave me a bit of trouble, so I'd save those for last so I wouldn't waste time on them until they were last. It's all about personal preference and playing to your strengths, which you will determine only through rigorous practice, and then learning how to use your time effectively to play to those strengths.

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

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby bp shinners » Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:58 am

Sure, just PayPal $5 to...

Just kidding.

1: Read the introduction and make your setup

2: Read the rules and symbolize them using your preferred method

3: Recheck your symbolization of the rules (seriously, do it)

4: Identify any player that doesn't show up in the rules - this person can go anywhere, and is thus important to keep in your back pocket as a random

5: Make deductions - 'deduction' is a fancy word for 'combination of 2 or more rules'. There's nothing special about it - you're literally looking for the same letter/player/group/slot to show up twice, and that's about it.

a) Check your first rule. See if it interacts with any other rule (either because they share a player, both talk about the same slot/group, both limit distributions)

b) Repeat step 5a for each other rule

6: Make scenarios

a) Check to see if any single player (or group of players) is so constrained that they're only able to fit in 2-3 different places. Make scenarios based on these placements, especially if they interact with any other rules. Bam, you now have 2-3 skeletons that define all the possibilities. This usually comes in the form of blocks for ordering games, an ordering chain with a 'focal point' of one player in ordering games, a Must Be Together rule in grouping games, or a player that shows up in 3 or more rules in any game (count each part of a multi-part rule for this purpose).

b) Check to see if any single slot is so constrained that there are only 1-2 different players that will go there. Make scenarios based on those players in that slot. Bam, you now have 1-2 skeletons that define all the possibilities. This usually comes from an option in an ordering game (if at least one of the option players shows up in other rules), or a group that is almost-but-not-completely filled out in a grouping game.

c) Check if there's anything else that limits the possibilities to 2-3. Make scenarios based on this. This is a catch-all based on those weird rules that sometimes show up (like mauve dinos). It also shows up in grouping games where you’re selecting members from subgroups (3 types of scientists on a panel of 5)/ If you have a rule that you know is weird (because it's not one of the normal rules for that type of game), think about scenarios based around it.

7: Go to the questions

a) Elimination (which of the following could be a complete and accurate) - Don't look at your work. Read a rule, eliminate an answer or two. This is the fastest way, by far, to approach these problems.

b) Conditional ("If _______", or anything that gives you a new piece of information) - Draw a NEW diagram with the piece of information and any deductions you made in your setup. See if the new piece of info interacts with your first rule. Then, your second, and so on until you've gotten through all of the rules. If one of the rules lets you make a deduction, start over again with the first rule (but this time you can skip the rule you already used to make a deduction). If you have scenarios, see if the new piece of info limits you to 1-2 of them, and use them.

c) Absolute ("Which of the following must/could be true/false?") - If you made the deductions, you should be able to answer these without doing any work. Use your setups/scenarios to answer them. If you don't have the answer in your setup, you missed a deduction. If this is a "Which of the following Must Be True?" question, the answer will be the deduction, and you can add it to your setup. THIS IS THE ONLY TIME YOU SHOULD EVER ADD ANYTHING TO YOUR SETUP AFTER YOU FINISH IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE GAME!
8: Do the Happy Dance.

M.M.
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:16 pm

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby M.M. » Wed Oct 31, 2012 6:37 pm

bp shinners wrote:Sure, just PayPal $5 to...

Just kidding.

1: Read the introduction and make your setup

2: Read the rules and symbolize them using your preferred method

3: Recheck your symbolization of the rules (seriously, do it)

4: Identify any player that doesn't show up in the rules - this person can go anywhere, and is thus important to keep in your back pocket as a random

5: Make deductions - 'deduction' is a fancy word for 'combination of 2 or more rules'. There's nothing special about it - you're literally looking for the same letter/player/group/slot to show up twice, and that's about it.

a) Check your first rule. See if it interacts with any other rule (either because they share a player, both talk about the same slot/group, both limit distributions)

b) Repeat step 5a for each other rule

6: Make scenarios

a) Check to see if any single player (or group of players) is so constrained that they're only able to fit in 2-3 different places. Make scenarios based on these placements, especially if they interact with any other rules. Bam, you now have 2-3 skeletons that define all the possibilities. This usually comes in the form of blocks for ordering games, an ordering chain with a 'focal point' of one player in ordering games, a Must Be Together rule in grouping games, or a player that shows up in 3 or more rules in any game (count each part of a multi-part rule for this purpose).

b) Check to see if any single slot is so constrained that there are only 1-2 different players that will go there. Make scenarios based on those players in that slot. Bam, you now have 1-2 skeletons that define all the possibilities. This usually comes from an option in an ordering game (if at least one of the option players shows up in other rules), or a group that is almost-but-not-completely filled out in a grouping game.

c) Check if there's anything else that limits the possibilities to 2-3. Make scenarios based on this. This is a catch-all based on those weird rules that sometimes show up (like mauve dinos). It also shows up in grouping games where you’re selecting members from subgroups (3 types of scientists on a panel of 5)/ If you have a rule that you know is weird (because it's not one of the normal rules for that type of game), think about scenarios based around it.

7: Go to the questions

a) Elimination (which of the following could be a complete and accurate) - Don't look at your work. Read a rule, eliminate an answer or two. This is the fastest way, by far, to approach these problems.

b) Conditional ("If _______", or anything that gives you a new piece of information) - Draw a NEW diagram with the piece of information and any deductions you made in your setup. See if the new piece of info interacts with your first rule. Then, your second, and so on until you've gotten through all of the rules. If one of the rules lets you make a deduction, start over again with the first rule (but this time you can skip the rule you already used to make a deduction). If you have scenarios, see if the new piece of info limits you to 1-2 of them, and use them.

c) Absolute ("Which of the following must/could be true/false?") - If you made the deductions, you should be able to answer these without doing any work. Use your setups/scenarios to answer them. If you don't have the answer in your setup, you missed a deduction. If this is a "Which of the following Must Be True?" question, the answer will be the deduction, and you can add it to your setup. THIS IS THE ONLY TIME YOU SHOULD EVER ADD ANYTHING TO YOUR SETUP AFTER YOU FINISH IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE GAME!
8: Do the Happy Dance.




Image

Thanks BP.

One quick question - how useful or important do you think scenarios are?

I have always had a terrible time with them and rarely found them helpful. But I still suck at LG without them ... and maybe they're a necessary piece of the puzzle and I just need to master them. But I really don't want to unless it's necessary.

As an example:
PT 14 Game 2. This seems like a perfect game for scenarios, but it still takes a long time for me

I started making scenarios in which - first - MP was in spot 1 and 2, w/j and w/j were the possibilities for the glassware, and then I had to put f/k for 5, f/k/s/ for 6, and f/s for 7. That's one scenario, but it has a lot of options. Is that just something you deal with?

And for the other major possibility, Utensils before glassware, there's basically the same options for 1 and 2 but now either F/S is in 3, j/w are in 4 and 5, and MP in 6 and 7

It just seems like a lot to think about, I guess .. It sucks because I zoomed through the questions after making the possibilities, but for like PT 8 Game 3

I started out putting R in 2 ... and it looks like F/J/H can go in 1 AND 3 ... which doesn't seem very limiting especially when you can also put R in 4 and have many more options there.

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

Re: How much time improvement on logic games to expect?

Postby bp shinners » Wed Oct 31, 2012 7:02 pm

M.M. wrote:I started making scenarios in which - first - MP was in spot 1 and 2, w/j and w/j were the possibilities for the glassware, and then I had to put f/k for 5, f/k/s/ for 6, and f/s for 7. That's one scenario, but it has a lot of options. Is that just something you deal with?

And for the other major possibility, Utensils before glassware, there's basically the same options for 1 and 2 but now either F/S is in 3, j/w are in 4 and 5, and MP in 6 and 7

It just seems like a lot to think about, I guess ..


I think scenarios are extremely helpful, but not necessary. You can definitely get through a game without them; however, it'll be slower and less certain.

You have to recognize what scenarios aren't, however - they're not complete solutions to the game. You don't need to fill in every slot. You just need to create 2-3 'skeleton's that define every possibility so you can make a deduction or two and already have a head start on the work when you get to the questions.

So what you did is exactly what I would have done. Those options shouldn't be scary - you should feel good about them. They're severely limiting what can go in those slots. And you know have a great starting point for the questions. And believe me, it's a lot more to think about if you're trying to do it in your head, or re-derive those scenarios for each question. Especially since this game had a lot of absolute questions - trying out all those possibilities will be a lot slower than just being able to look up at your ordering chains/scenarios.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, Instrumental, Lahtso Nuggin and 15 guests