JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[warandpeace]

What is the Cambridge material everyone seems to be using? Is anyone using Pithypike's guide? Is Powerscore advised for self-study?

[John_rizzy_rawls]

What is the Cambridge material everyone seems to be using? Is anyone using Pithypike's guide? Is Powerscore advised for self-study?

Also curious about this.

[mindarmed]

What is the Cambridge material everyone seems to be using? Is anyone using Pithypike's guide? Is Powerscore advised for self-study?

Also curious about this.

http://www.cambridgelsat.com/problem-sets/

HTH

[crazyrobin]

What is the Cambridge material everyone seems to be using? Is anyone using Pithypike's guide? Is Powerscore advised for self-study?

http://www.cambridgelsat.com/bundles/
I like those bundles, those bundles are categorized according to Manhattan LSAT guide.

[John_rizzy_rawls]

What is the Cambridge material everyone seems to be using? Is anyone using Pithypike's guide? Is Powerscore advised for self-study?

Also curious about this.

http://www.cambridgelsat.com/problem-sets/

HTH

More or less useful than LGB's categories?

[crazyrobin]

Cambridge drilling for the day:

Games - Complex Ordering, levels 1-4, -2 total, stupid mistakes
p8, (4:53), 6Q, level 1
p9, (4:15), 6Q, level 2
p10, (4:27), 5Q, level 2
p11, (5:45), 7Q, -1, level 2 (thought I didn't need to make a hypo for this one, using my other diagrams, I selected the wrong answer, turns out I did need a hypo)
p12, (4:32), 5Q, level 2
p13, (6:34), 7Q, -1, level 2 (screwed up diagram, had to go backwards, interesting problem to do though, check it out: PT 5, S2, G4)
p14, (5:37), 7Q, level 2
p15, (6:34), 6Q, level 2
p16, (5:48), 6Q, level 2
p22, (5:56), level 4

RC - PT 14, (untimed, felt quick, I'd guess less than 40, definitely less than 45, but no exact numbers yet because I'm focusing on accuracy), -1
Wrong: #11
Unsure: #21 (A and B), main point, went with A because it was more strongly supported by the entire passage, whereas B was basically just a summary of the author's view on one part of the passage, but very similar.

Today I finished Cambridge's Complex Ordering section which, combined with the Relative Ordering section and Simple Ordering section I finished, means that I'm done with all of the ordering games, for now, the remaining will be included in hybrid PTs. I should finish my first pass of all of Cambridge's game sections this week, I'll revisit many of them during LR and RC drilling. I'm about 1/3, probably closer to 1/2 of the way through all of the LR problems, which means that as of now, I'm on schedule to finish most, if not all, of drilling and begin PTs in mid/late February.

Man, I did PT 10 RC today, -0!!!!! ( Still can't believe it ) but I took another approach, I literally read every passage twice..... ( I know ) I will go back to Manhattan RC guide and tried to finish PS RC bible to see if I can gain some insights.

[warandpeace]

How credited? I've never seen it mentioned on TLS before

[crazyrobin]

More or less useful than LGB's categories?

I would say probably the same?

You can also take T14's game classification, you can find it here. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=1042536

[Daily_Double]

.

[crazyrobin]

How credited? I've never seen it mentioned on TLS before

I think TLS consensus is if you drill by type ( those bundles classify every LG&LR question into different types, so you don't have to find it by yourself), you'll have a more systematic approach to different type of questions.

[John_rizzy_rawls]

More or less useful than LGB's categories?

I would say probably the same?

You can also take T14's game classification, you can find it here. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=1042536

This is what I've been using. Just wanted to see if the Cambridge categories made things at easier. Figured they're about the same.

[Daily_Double]

.

[Daily_Double]

.

[TJFergu85]

I would argue that Cambridge makes things easier by offering the questions as downloads, it's easy to reprint mistakes and multiple clean copies, I hate erasing and copying shit. Furthermore it's easier to drill 30 questions/question types/games in a row, because you don't have to have to flip through the books. But this is probably just because I'm lazy.

I could not agree more. On my last go at studying, I would flip through pages of PTs and or pages of pdfs. I finally decided to splurge a little and buy the Cambridge LG bundle. It is sooooo much easier to go through simultaneously with LGB or MLSAT. You have a list of every game type at your finger tip. Like DD said, you also can download the PDFs and print it easily. Worth the money, end of story.

[John_rizzy_rawls]

I would argue that Cambridge makes things easier by offering the questions as downloads, it's easy to reprint mistakes and multiple clean copies, I hate erasing and copying shit. Furthermore it's easier to drill 30 questions/question types/games in a row, because you don't have to have to flip through the books. But this is probably just because I'm lazy.

I could not agree more. On my last go at studying, I would flip through pages of PTs and or pages of pdfs. I finally decided to splurge a little and buy the Cambridge LG bundle. It is sooooo much easier to go through simultaneously with LGB or MLSAT. You have a list of every game type at your finger tip. Like DD said, you also can download the PDFs and print it easily. Worth the money, end of story.

Done and done. Thanks.

[rebexness]

[objection_your_honor]

Finishing up the MLSAT LG Guide, and my tour around games by type using PTs 19-38. 3D grouping are the only ones giving me major trouble (9-11 mins).

I'll start MLSAT LR early next week, and tour the types via Cambridge until March. I've also printed out every RC from PT 18-38 and will continue to drill games.

March I begin PT'ing regularly. I may take one to kick off February, too.

[objection_your_honor]

As for organization: alligator clips, labeled file folders. I have games printed out and grouped by type (made the PDFs myself using PTs -- PT numbers added to the top of each game), stacked together with game types on the cover sheets. I have flagged games where I did not have an optimal setup, performed slowly, made an error on, etc.

This way I can continue to look at them/drill them and eventually make "super LG" sections of all my toughest games.

When preparing for October 2012 I had stacks everywhere. Looking back, I wish I had been better organized so that's what I've resolved to do this time.

[redecember]

How long did it take for you guys to finish the LGB?

[A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A]

How long did it take for you guys to finish the LGB?

I don't even know, but I just got MLG in the mail and it makes LGB look like a little baby.

[redecember]

How long did it take for you guys to finish the LGB?

I don't even know, but I just got MLG in the mail and it makes LGB look like a little baby.

LOL yeah.. I have both (Noodley's guide )

[objection_your_honor]

The whole last chunk has all the games in the book over again with written diagrams. It's useful as a reference but the book proper is only ~500 pages.

[A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A]

The whole last chunk has all the games in the book over again with written diagrams. It's useful as a reference but the book proper is only ~500 pages.

Yep. 526 in MLG 3rd Ed. and 382 in LGB 2nd Ed.

[warandpeace]

technically then we can pass on buying manhattan since they've posted their instructions on how to do each game online? and pass on cambridge if we already did the photocopies/organized by type?

is anyone getting strategy down first before they begin consistently PTing, or is everyone doing strategy/drilling while PTing? I've only really seen study guides that focus on the latter.

Good luck to everyone prepping today

[griffin.811]

Drilling Flaw level 3 from Cambridge...very frustrating, but I see why I cant get below -6 consistently.