Any Tips for Grouping In/Out Selection Games Please? Forum

[boris09]

Hello all (and by all, I mean the few who may actually read this). Although this first post seems quite cliche' in regards to needing help, rather than contributing elsewhere, I'd just like to mention that although I am a first time poster, I am a long-time lurker.

Long story short...I've suddenly hit a roadblock in my studies as I am having the most difficulty in Grouping games that deal with In/Out Selection. Sometimes I would just look at the rules, write them out, and then when the questions come along I have no clue how to most efficiently and effectively use these rules to get the answer being asked for. I feel that most of this difficulty comes from the fact that in these types of games exclude the use of a diagram, which generally provides greater visual aid than written out variables (IMO).

If anyone could please offer me their approach to these games I would greatly appreciate it!

[kiyoku]

Wait, but lots of them do make use of the diagram.

Are you speaking specifically of back-end games? (Games where the diagram cannot be filled out very much)?

[kiyoku]

If you're speaking of back-end games:

1) pay attention to the rules that you could not efficiently notate onto your diagram (if I can't find a way to include the notation into the diagram then i'll put a star beside it) so I don't forget it
2) The questions are key to a back-end game as well. There will always be important conditions that, if you combine with your original rules, you'll end up domino-ing your way to the answer.

I find that my first set of improvement from back-end games was when I realized that I need to be quick about taking the extra info from the new conditions presented within the question, and then making it interact with the new rules. See the new inferences, look for the answer. Move on.

[bp shinners]

I feel that most of this difficulty comes from the fact that in these types of games exclude the use of a diagram, which generally provides greater visual aid than written out variables (IMO).

I don't get what you mean by this - In/Out grouping games most definitely have associated diagrams, and they're often quite useful in figuring the game out.

Do you mean that you don't get spacial relationships, instead just getting conditional statements, like you would in an ordering game? If that's the case, then you're right - that's a tough transition for a lot of students to make. Everything's a little more up in the air because you're not dealing with absolute statements any more. However, you have to learn to trust in your conditionals and work through them.

Also, if the same player shows up in a few rules, it might be worthwhile to set up a scenario where that player is In, and one where they're Out.

[Cicero76]

Manhattan's method made this way easier for me

[sabanist]

Because I'm lazy and don't feel like typing out my method all over again, I'm just going to quote the old post where I did it before:

These were actually my favorite games once I figured out what worked for me. Instead of doing complex diagrams, I would simply write out every potential member/non-member of the group under the question and circle the "in"s and strike through the "out"s according to the global/local rules.

Example:

ABCDEFG are eligible to go on a field trip.
If A goes, B doesn't go.
If C goes, D goes.
Either F or G goes, but not both.

Local question: If C and F are on the trip, what is the maximum number of students on the trip?

I write out, ABCDEFG.
I circle C and F (bolded here): ABCDEFG
I glance at the rules. D has to go, and G cannot go. I circle/strike through accordingly: ABCDEFG
Then I think as quickly as possible according to the question, and scribble more of those hypotheticals as necessary. Writing them out helps me visualize the problem, see all of the options, and think through them faster than if I was juggling all of the possibilities in my head.

Hope this helps!

[boris09]

First off I'd just like to thank everyone that posted, I really appreciate all the help

Perhaps I may be speaking of back-end games, but this need for help really stirred from the game about CDs (I believe it was PT 31, Game 2). PT 33 Game 2 (the Bird-watchers) also gave me trouble as I found myself mapping out all the rules and the inferences to a point where I didn't even know what to do with them anymore.

Feeding off of bp shinners point, I think that the lack of a spacial relationship may indeed be the reason behind the disparity of my linear/advanced linear success versus my first true attempt at grouping games.

Thank you for the help Sabanist, I will definitely try this method and see if it works. And also thank you Cicero, i was thinking of trying Manhattan after I went through powerscore.

[LSAT Blog]

These games are definitely tricky.

In my opinion, the key is understanding how the conditional rules link together, then correctly interpreting the conditional rule,- particularly, the difference between:

- a conditional where a positive variable is the sufficient condition and a negative variable is the necessary condition
- a conditional where a negative variable is the sufficient condition and a positive variable is the necessary condition

I have some posts on my site about this game type. Just sent you a PM with some tips as well.

Hope this helps!