JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby wtrc » Sat Mar 16, 2013 4:45 pm

Daily_Double wrote:
Kool-Aid wrote:
weathercoins wrote:PT 52

LR1: -1 (#16)
LG: -2 (#3, 17)
LR2: -3 (16,17,25)
RC: 0

93/99 raw, 174 scaled

Have not yet reviewed, but I'm actually really confused. The LG must have been careless errors, and this hasn't happened in a while. Yet my best RC ever before this was -4, so I'm so pumped by the RC. I think I did this PT like a year and a half ago, so not sure how accurate the score is.


Good job weather! I keep missing a couple on LG, careless errors as well. I'd die to go -0 on RC, I don't think I've ever went less than -2.


The things I would do to go -0 on RC on June 10, 2013... It's bad. And awesome work weathercoins.


Haha, thanks guys. Yeah, same with me about the -0 on RC. This feels nice but really not getting my hopes up.

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Sat Mar 16, 2013 6:11 pm

On break from PT53 after going straight through first three sections. LG went well, less certain about my LR performance.. some questions were pretty tough!

User avatar
fips tedora
Posts: 3767
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 8:28 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby fips tedora » Sat Mar 16, 2013 6:21 pm

So far I've taken 4 preptests and my last one (32) was a 163. Between reviewing and taking more preptests, what should I do? If I can get my RC down to single digits, I will have no problem getting into the 170s. My LR is getting real tight and LG is getting better with more practice.

User avatar
ColeWorldNoBlanket
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 6:45 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby ColeWorldNoBlanket » Sat Mar 16, 2013 6:48 pm

**Sneaks into thread with first post**

Just took my first PT...got a 167

PT 21:

LG (-11)
LR1 (-2)
LR2 (-3)
RC (-2)

User avatar
fips tedora
Posts: 3767
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 8:28 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby fips tedora » Sat Mar 16, 2013 7:09 pm

ColeWorldNoBlanket wrote:**Sneaks into thread with first post**

Just took my first PT...got a 167

PT 21:

LG (-11)
LR1 (-2)
LR2 (-3)
RC (-2)

You're gonna be straight bro, LG is one of the easiest sections to improve on as well as score perfectly.

bdeans91
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:43 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby bdeans91 » Sat Mar 16, 2013 7:24 pm

Shit you guys. I was planning on drilling a full RC section today in one sitting, but PT 21 Sec IV Passage 1 killed me.

Took 12-13 minutes and I got 4/8.

I -1'd my last RC section as well. I fucking didn't get this passage guys.

Edit: did the other 3 passages so efficiently that I still finished in time and finished with a -4 (as implied, I was perfect on the following 3 sections)... what an annoyance.
Last edited by bdeans91 on Sat Mar 16, 2013 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
objection_your_honor
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 2:19 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby objection_your_honor » Sat Mar 16, 2013 7:48 pm

PT 52

LR: -4
LG: -0
LR: -1
RC: -0

94 / 176

Of the 5 I missed, 3 were absolute blind guesses because of timing. I need to drill the F out of assumption family LR this week to put some time in the bank. Working on set-in-stone metrics (like 15 questions in 15 minutes) should also help. LG and RC are easier for me to pace because there are 4 big blocks.

Warmed up doing an RC passage and looking over a few past LR sections I've completed. I generally have a hard time handling the first section of a PT no matter what it is.
Last edited by objection_your_honor on Sat Mar 16, 2013 7:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Sat Mar 16, 2013 7:49 pm

CardozoLaw09 wrote:On break from PT53 after going straight through first three sections. LG went well, less certain about my LR performance.. some questions were pretty tough!


I can only laugh at how bad I did on the second RC passage; worst ever.. don't know what happened. If it weren't for that catastrophe I would have been pretty pleased with the overall result.

53

LR -4
LG -1
LR -4
RC.........wait for it....... -11 :|

RC can go fuck itself

User avatar
Fianna13
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:05 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Fianna13 » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:08 pm

things I would do for -1 for LG...

homie1515
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby homie1515 » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:10 pm

Fianna13 wrote:things I would do for -1 for LG...


study??

User avatar
eliztudorr
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby eliztudorr » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:14 pm

i HATE it when there's DOUBLE NEGATIVES in answer choices.......

User avatar
eliztudorr
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby eliztudorr » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:15 pm

CardozoLaw09 wrote:
CardozoLaw09 wrote:On break from PT53 after going straight through first three sections. LG went well, less certain about my LR performance.. some questions were pretty tough!


I can only laugh at how bad I did on the second RC passage; worst ever.. don't know what happened. If it weren't for that catastrophe I would have been pretty pleased with the overall result.

53

LR -4
LG -1
LR -4
RC.........wait for it....... -11 :|

RC can go fuck itself


i second your suggestion that RC should go F itself.... i missed -12 so we are on similar boats...i keep misreading shit with double negatives....

User avatar
crazyrobin
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:52 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby crazyrobin » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:23 pm

eliztudorr wrote:
i second your suggestion that RC should go F itself.... i missed -12 so we are on similar boats...i keep misreading shit with double negatives....

I feel your pain.

No person cannot win the game. <------------ :shock: I believe LSAT is worse than this.
LOL anyway, I managed to understand it with diagram. So you may want to try it, you know, just in case it may help.

User avatar
eliztudorr
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby eliztudorr » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:25 pm

crazyrobin wrote:
eliztudorr wrote:
i second your suggestion that RC should go F itself.... i missed -12 so we are on similar boats...i keep misreading shit with double negatives....

I feel your pain.

No person cannot win the game. <------------ :shock: I believe LSAT is worse than this.
LOL anyway, I managed to understand it with diagram. So you may want to try it, you know, just in case it may help.


diagram? like the passage? can you give me an example? would really appreciate it ><" im feeling desperate. and honestly your "no person cannot win the game" already made my mind go blank =.= this is like mix signals to me lol like do you like me or do you like me not. JUST SAY IT.

User avatar
crazyrobin
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:52 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby crazyrobin » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:43 pm

eliztudorr wrote:diagram? like the passage? can you give me an example? would really appreciate it ><" im feeling desperate. and honestly your "no person cannot win the game" already made my mind go blank =.= this is like mix signals to me lol like do you like me or do you like me not. JUST SAY IT.

Sure, check PT24, S2, Q21
What I did is draw a box, inside is effective law. Then beside the box is another box inside is enforceable.
So this answer tells us that effective law and enforceable is overlapped right?
Then I just interpret it as effective law is enforceable.

After couple times, I can do it in my mind. Hope this helps.

User avatar
eliztudorr
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby eliztudorr » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:46 pm

crazyrobin wrote:
eliztudorr wrote:diagram? like the passage? can you give me an example? would really appreciate it ><" im feeling desperate. and honestly your "no person cannot win the game" already made my mind go blank =.= this is like mix signals to me lol like do you like me or do you like me not. JUST SAY IT.

Sure, check PT24, S2, Q21
What I did is draw a box, inside is effective law. Then beside the box is another box inside is enforceable.
So this answer tells us that effective law and enforceable is overlapped right?
Then I just interpret it as effective law is enforceable.

After couple times, I can do it in my mind. Hope this helps.


interesting. i will try that. thanks!!!

User avatar
crazyrobin
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:52 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby crazyrobin » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:53 pm

eliztudorr wrote:
interesting. i will try that. thanks!!!


One suggestion and it's down to heart: drill, drill, drill, drill the shit out of LR, it pays!

User avatar
eliztudorr
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby eliztudorr » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:58 pm

crazyrobin wrote:
eliztudorr wrote:
interesting. i will try that. thanks!!!


One suggestion and it's down to heart: drill, drill, drill, drill the shit out of LR, it pays!


:) thanks!!! im doing everything i can!

Daily_Double
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Daily_Double » Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:04 pm

Check out PT 52, LR1, #16, for a great example of how the credited answer to parallel flaw questions doesn't necessarily have to replicate every element of the stimulus.

User avatar
eliztudorr
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby eliztudorr » Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:09 pm

Daily_Double wrote:Check out PT 52, LR1, #16, for a great example of how the credited answer to parallel flaw questions doesn't necessarily have to replicate every element of the stimulus.


i remember this one. this one is the relation between belief and something being true or not.

Daily_Double
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Daily_Double » Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:14 pm

eliztudorr wrote:
Daily_Double wrote:Check out PT 52, LR1, #16, for a great example of how the credited answer to parallel flaw questions doesn't necessarily have to replicate every element of the stimulus.


i remember this one. this one is the relation between belief and something being true or not.


Yeah you're correct. If I remember correctly, it went something along the lies of:

Belief in A ---> Belief in B
~B
Therefore: Belief in A is false

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:23 pm

Daily_Double wrote:
eliztudorr wrote:
Daily_Double wrote:Check out PT 52, LR1, #16, for a great example of how the credited answer to parallel flaw questions doesn't necessarily have to replicate every element of the stimulus.


i remember this one. this one is the relation between belief and something being true or not.


Yeah you're correct. If I remember correctly, it went something along the lies of:

Belief in A ---> Belief in B
~B
Therefore: Belief in A is false


Edited:
The question being: does conclusively proving that B doesn't exist necessarily entail that your belief in the thing that assured your belief in B is false? I don't think so LSAC :roll:
Last edited by CardozoLaw09 on Sun Mar 17, 2013 12:47 am, edited 2 times in total.

rebexness
Posts: 4163
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:24 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby rebexness » Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:24 pm

Took my "first" timed PT. Am a little mad. Managed to do extremely well on logic games, but blew LR hard (more wrong in each section than I normally go (on actual LSAT) in both LR combined. JFC.

At least my LG work paid off. -3, 2 of which was on a game that I thought I misread a rule on.

I finished every section with 5+ to spare, so I am going to work on slowing down as well.

Back to LR drilling, I guess. I will review this test tonight and take a different PT tomorrow. Perhaps my brain just checked out.

ETA: My raw score went up significantly, so I will take that as a plus. June 2007 test, SMD.

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Sun Mar 17, 2013 1:41 am

Could have EASILY gone -1 on the second LR section of PT53 if it weren't for careless reading errors. :x

Daily_Double
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Daily_Double » Sun Mar 17, 2013 1:46 am

CardozoLaw09 wrote:Could have EASILY gone -1 on the second LR section of PT53 if it weren't for careless reading errors. :x


Keep up the good work, we'll both go -0 on LR come game day.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nimbus cloud and 6 guests