Using Manhattan and Powerscore Forum

[Njdeh]

Has anyone done this with success? From a quick judge it seems irrational and negative to use two different sets of methodology. Is this recommended?

[eerie_erie]

Powerscore. Lots of detailed explanations. My instructor was serious, got us to care, and raised my score. Keep in mind I'm only one voice though.

[totoro]

Lots of people read both. I don't think it's confusing really, because in the end you should do what works best for you, and with practice you'll find your preferred strategies.

Also for LR, at least, I don't think PS has a "methodology" necessarily - LRB is more a bunch of information. Manhattan gives you a much more actionable methodology on how to approach the different question types. So I read LRB for knowledge and used Manhattan for strategy.

[dusters]

I've read both. Used only powerscore for my first test, scored a 162. Used mostly only manhattan this time around with just a few reviews on specific sections for powerscore. Overall I think they are both very good. Powerscore to me seems a bit wordy at times, and it complicates LR more than I think it needs to.

[EEguy5]

If you have the time, absolutely use both! The only rationale for not using both would be if you are too close to the test and you dont want to confuse yourself, but even then, I think that would only make since for LG. For LR they both offer analysis, tips, strategies for each question type and reading both is nothing but beneficial. The fact that they may have a different name for the same type of question does not matter, at least not for me.

If you MUST only use one, id say for LG it doesnt matter, both will get you to -0 just pick one and put in the practice. For LR I would definitely recommend Manhattan. For me it makes a lot more sense. But then again, it could just be personal, as other people may prefer the opposite. So go ahead and try both and see what works for you!

[sabanist]

I used both in the sense that I looked over both methods, tried them both in drilling, and stuck with the one that worked best for me. Manhattan's methods for assumption family questions saved my life, but LRB's "some train" was the only thing that helped me with formal logic. Reading and trying both seems confusing at first, but you'll eventually figure out which method works best for different question types if you give yourself enough time to study before the test.

[LegaleZy]

I'm currently using both and picking and choosing which method I want to use depending on what I'm working on. Sometimes theres a lot overlap in methods used by MLSAT and PG, but where there is not I like seeing multiple ways to approach a question type and then choosing which one I'm more comfortable using.