JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

[objection_your_honor]

Got a 168 a couple of weekends ago, deputydog. The next weekend I got a 180. This weekend I went 176 and 172, so don't be discouraged as it's likely an outlier (but still an important indicator).

[objection_your_honor]

Also you guys with 3.x+ should please just stay away from UVA so guys like armedwithamind and I have a chance.

[tuffyjohnson]

Got a 168 a couple of weekends ago, deputydog. The next weekend I got a 180. This weekend I went 176 and 172, so don't be discouraged as it's likely an outlier (but still an important indicator).

Can you guys name a few PT's that are NON outliers on either side? I need to take a couple PT's here to quick to determine if JUNE is a go or if I need to hold off until OCT.

[objection_your_honor]

Got a 168 a couple of weekends ago, deputydog. The next weekend I got a 180. This weekend I went 176 and 172, so don't be discouraged as it's likely an outlier (but still an important indicator).

Can you guys name a few PT's that are NON outliers on either side? I need to take a couple PT's here to quick to determine if JUNE is a go or if I need to hold off until OCT.

It's not the PTs themselves, but the natural variance in one's ability to score consistently. Sometimes all the stars align, and sometimes it's a perfect storm, but most times you're somewhere in between. What I am referring to as "outliers" are those scores on the extremes.

For diagnostic purposes, any test in the 50s or 60s will give you a pretty reliable read on what you are likely to score in June.

[052220151]

Got a 168 a couple of weekends ago, deputydog. The next weekend I got a 180. This weekend I went 176 and 172, so don't be discouraged as it's likely an outlier (but still an important indicator).

Yea man. I've gone a ton of PTs in a row above 170. This 168 is just motivation to work harder and know that I'm not home free.

[tuffyjohnson]

Got a 168 a couple of weekends ago, deputydog. The next weekend I got a 180. This weekend I went 176 and 172, so don't be discouraged as it's likely an outlier (but still an important indicator).

Can you guys name a few PT's that are NON outliers on either side? I need to take a couple PT's here to quick to determine if JUNE is a go or if I need to hold off until OCT.

It's not the PTs themselves, but the natural variance in one's ability to score consistently. Sometimes all the stars align, and sometimes it's a perfect storm, but most times you're somewhere in between. What I am referring to as "outliers" are those scores on the extremes.

For diagnostic purposes, any test in the 50s or 60s will give you a pretty reliable read on what you are likely to score in June.

Well, RhymeslikeDimes says 68 (DEC 2012) was one of the hardest ever. Just trying to avoid those for the purpose of figuring out if I'm close to being ready.

[objection_your_honor]

Got a 168 a couple of weekends ago, deputydog. The next weekend I got a 180. This weekend I went 176 and 172, so don't be discouraged as it's likely an outlier (but still an important indicator).

Can you guys name a few PT's that are NON outliers on either side? I need to take a couple PT's here to quick to determine if JUNE is a go or if I need to hold off until OCT.

It's not the PTs themselves, but the natural variance in one's ability to score consistently. Sometimes all the stars align, and sometimes it's a perfect storm, but most times you're somewhere in between. What I am referring to as "outliers" are those scores on the extremes.

For diagnostic purposes, any test in the 50s or 60s will give you a pretty reliable read on what you are likely to score in June.

Well, RhymeslikeDimes says 68 (DEC 2012) was one of the hardest ever. Just trying to avoid those for the purpose of figuring out if I'm close to being ready.

Maybe a particular section was harder than average, but chances are the other sections were easier than average. It all evens out. There is no significant difference in net difficulty, PT to PT.

[SteelPenguin]

Well, RhymeslikeDimes says 68 (DEC 2012) was one of the hardest ever. Just trying to avoid those for the purpose of figuring out if I'm close to being ready.

For what it's worth, that was my real LSAT and I underperformed a bit. I ended up missing more in each section than my PTs, especially LG -5 or more and around -8 between the two LRs. I've tried to block it out of my mind, but I plan on retaking it and reviewing it about one month before the test.

[objection_your_honor]

Well, RhymeslikeDimes says 68 (DEC 2012) was one of the hardest ever. Just trying to avoid those for the purpose of figuring out if I'm close to being ready.

For what it's worth, that was my real LSAT and I underperformed a bit. I ended up missing more in each section than my PTs, especially LG -5 or more and around -8 between the two LRs. I've tried to block it out of my mind, but I plan on retaking it and reviewing it about one month before the test.

It's not uncommon to underperform on the official writing of the LSAT, especially LG, no matter which one you take. I took the October 2012 test and the same thing happened to me. Confirmation bias will lead you to think that the test itself was uniquely hard. Don't fall for that trap or you might find yourself thinking "damn, this must be a hard one" in the middle of your next official LG section.

[the_pakalypse]

Well, RhymeslikeDimes says 68 (DEC 2012) was one of the hardest ever. Just trying to avoid those for the purpose of figuring out if I'm close to being ready.

For what it's worth, that was my real LSAT and I underperformed a bit. I ended up missing more in each section than my PTs, especially LG -5 or more and around -8 between the two LRs. I've tried to block it out of my mind, but I plan on retaking it and reviewing it about one month before the test.

It's not uncommon to underperform on the official writing of the LSAT, especially LG, no matter which one you take. I took the October 2012 test and the same thing happened to me. Confirmation bias will lead you to think that the test itself was uniquely hard. Don't fall for that trap or you might find yourself thinking "damn, this must be a hard one" in the middle of your next official LG section.

So true, I thought Dec 2011 LG was ridiculously hard... although I still think it's a bit higher on the difficulty scale

[CardozoLaw09]

Confirmation bias

This is interesting -- never heard of this concept before

[The-Specs]

Hey guys, got my first 180 today on PT 49.

My only miss was on LG which to me made no sense. I just forgot a rule when answering one question. Finished each section with at least 4 min to go so there was no need to rush through the question. Overall today games gave me more problems than normal. Obviously I am pleased but that kind of a slip-up is going to keep me humble. This week I start three-a-weeks and now that I have tasted a 180 i am not anxious to give it up.

Keep working everyone, if I can do it you all can.

[rebexness]

168 today bros. All because of RC. Confidence shook, must pound brews.

sucks bro. i hope that we will be together at THE university of virginia

I'll scout bars for you guys.

I could fuck with cville.

Samesies.

[RhymesLikeDimes]

-14 could get you a 170 on the DEC test, so it was clearly a notch tougher than most of the more recent tests (curve has typically been -9-11 in recent years).

I'm holding out hope that UVA might give me $$$ if I do well enough on the LSAT. So I might be headed there as well.

[Pneumonia]

In the game, their was an indefinite amount of beads only differentiated by being one of five colors. And the number of beads to be chosen was indefinite as well.

I immediately knew exactly what game and question you were talking about. I missed that one drilling and it took me like half an hour to figure out why afterwards. I angrily circled the sh*t out of whatever indicator there was about it being "every" 8 objects once I saw it.

Also: checking in. have been lurking this thread since January and been very motivated.

[Chambo]

Did four LG sections today..

LG 25: -1 (2 minutes left)
LG 26: -3 (time)
LG 27: -4 (time)
LG 28: -1 (5 minutes left)

Woof. I can't seem to kick that one last fuckup on my good sections, and I'm still pretty shaky on the tougher games... Snakes and lizards was a womp trainwreck, and some of the other ones soaked up so much time that I needed to fly through the last game and missed some in my rush. I guess I could go back to the drawing board and drill by type. Any thoughts?

[SteelPenguin]

Did four LG sections today..

LG 25: -1 (2 minutes left)
LG 26: -3 (time)
LG 27: -4 (time)
LG 28: -1 (5 minutes left)

Woof. I can't seem to kick that one last fuckup on my good sections, and I'm still pretty shaky on the tougher games... Snakes and lizards was a womp trainwreck, and some of the other ones soaked up so much time that I needed to fly through the last game and missed some in my rush. I guess I could go back to the drawing board and drill by type. Any thoughts?

I took the LG for 27 a few minutes ago and ended up with a -7, my worst LG since my Dec LSAT. Snakes and lizards destroyed me. I probably spent over 5 minutes before I even answered the first question on that game. I ended up skipping the rest of it for the next game, and didn't get back to it. In addition to drills, I have to get into the habit of moving past questions I am hung up on.

[NoodleyOne]

Did four LG sections today..

LG 25: -1 (2 minutes left)
LG 26: -3 (time)
LG 27: -4 (time)
LG 28: -1 (5 minutes left)

Woof. I can't seem to kick that one last fuckup on my good sections, and I'm still pretty shaky on the tougher games... Snakes and lizards was a womp trainwreck, and some of the other ones soaked up so much time that I needed to fly through the last game and missed some in my rush. I guess I could go back to the drawing board and drill by type. Any thoughts?

You may want to try this. I did it with some of the people I tutor and it went well:

Cover up all the questions and just look at the stim+rules. Take as much time as you need and get every single inference you can, and get the best diagram you can. I don't think you want to use diagramming as a crutch, but you have about 7 weeks left, and getting back to the basics for a bit could definitely help. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be too comfortable with that type of variance on LG.

[homie1515]

Does everyone here recommend I PT from 40s'-->50's-->60's sequentially? Or split them up or do some other odd format for testing.

[052220151]

Did four LG sections today..

LG 25: -1 (2 minutes left)
LG 26: -3 (time)
LG 27: -4 (time)
LG 28: -1 (5 minutes left)

Woof. I can't seem to kick that one last fuckup on my good sections, and I'm still pretty shaky on the tougher games... Snakes and lizards was a womp trainwreck, and some of the other ones soaked up so much time that I needed to fly through the last game and missed some in my rush. I guess I could go back to the drawing board and drill by type. Any thoughts?

You may want to try this. I did it with some of the people I tutor and it went well:

Cover up all the questions and just look at the stim+rules. Take as much time as you need and get every single inference you can, and get the best diagram you can. I don't think you want to use diagramming as a crutch, but you have about 7 weeks left, and getting back to the basics for a bit could definitely help. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be too comfortable with that type of variance on LG.

LG is the easiest section to master. I wouldn't take the test until you know LG is an auto -0.

[NoodleyOne]

Did four LG sections today..

LG 25: -1 (2 minutes left)
LG 26: -3 (time)
LG 27: -4 (time)
LG 28: -1 (5 minutes left)

Woof. I can't seem to kick that one last fuckup on my good sections, and I'm still pretty shaky on the tougher games... Snakes and lizards was a womp trainwreck, and some of the other ones soaked up so much time that I needed to fly through the last game and missed some in my rush. I guess I could go back to the drawing board and drill by type. Any thoughts?

You may want to try this. I did it with some of the people I tutor and it went well:

Cover up all the questions and just look at the stim+rules. Take as much time as you need and get every single inference you can, and get the best diagram you can. I don't think you want to use diagramming as a crutch, but you have about 7 weeks left, and getting back to the basics for a bit could definitely help. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be too comfortable with that type of variance on LG.

LG is the easiest section to master. I wouldn't take the test until you know LG is an auto -0.

TBF, those are some of the hardest games sections out there, but yeah, I agree.

[052220151]

Did four LG sections today..

LG 25: -1 (2 minutes left)
LG 26: -3 (time)
LG 27: -4 (time)
LG 28: -1 (5 minutes left)

Woof. I can't seem to kick that one last fuckup on my good sections, and I'm still pretty shaky on the tougher games... Snakes and lizards was a womp trainwreck, and some of the other ones soaked up so much time that I needed to fly through the last game and missed some in my rush. I guess I could go back to the drawing board and drill by type. Any thoughts?

You may want to try this. I did it with some of the people I tutor and it went well:

Cover up all the questions and just look at the stim+rules. Take as much time as you need and get every single inference you can, and get the best diagram you can. I don't think you want to use diagramming as a crutch, but you have about 7 weeks left, and getting back to the basics for a bit could definitely help. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be too comfortable with that type of variance on LG.

LG is the easiest section to master. I wouldn't take the test until you know LG is an auto -0.

TBF, those are some of the hardest games sections out there, but yeah, I agree.

True, but once you get to that level there is no such thing as a hard game. You remember zones. IIRC you smashed it. I was a high 160s scorer and smashed it too. While some games are more difficult compared to each other, none are difficult if you prepare for them properly.

[wtrc]

For drilling LG, anybody feel that the first 5-7 tests or so are just useless? So different and so much weirder. Kind of kills my confidence when I attempt some of them actually.

[052220151]

For drilling LG, anybody feel that the first 5-7 tests or so are just useless? So different and so much weirder. Kind of kills my confidence when I attempt some of them actually.

They are funky for sure.

[RhymesLikeDimes]

Some of the very early LR questions are just idiotically worded.