Logic Games Bible and Blueprint methods Forum

[iiibbystar]

Hi all,

I have taken a Blueprint course, but am still having trouble with the logic games section (in terms of missing the key inferences that would unlock the game or just plainly taking too long to make those deductions). The course was great, but I am considering reading other materials to supplement my understanding of LG. I've heard positive things from everyone, especially on this forum, about the LGB and the Manhattan LSAT, and was wondering whether or not the methods differ significantly from BP? Are the methods or diagramming systems so different that I'm better off sticking to the method I started with? I'd really appreciate any advice you can give! Thanks!

[Clearly]

Hi all,

I have taken a Blueprint course, but am still having trouble with the logic games section (in terms of missing the key inferences that would unlock the game or just plainly taking too long to make those deductions). The course was great, but I am considering reading other materials to supplement my understanding of LG. I've heard positive things from everyone, especially on this forum, about the LGB and the Manhattan LSAT, and was wondering whether or not the methods differ significantly from BP? Are the methods or diagramming systems so different that I'm better off sticking to the method I started with? I'd really appreciate any advice you can give! Thanks!

Forget everything you know about lg and take velocity online.

[bp shinners]

Hi all,

I have taken a Blueprint course, but am still having trouble with the logic games section (in terms of missing the key inferences that would unlock the game or just plainly taking too long to make those deductions). The course was great, but I am considering reading other materials to supplement my understanding of LG. I've heard positive things from everyone, especially on this forum, about the LGB and the Manhattan LSAT, and was wondering whether or not the methods differ significantly from BP? Are the methods or diagramming systems so different that I'm better off sticking to the method I started with? I'd really appreciate any advice you can give! Thanks!

For the most part, they're not different enough that it will seem like a different language, though there are some elements that don't line up exactly (Manhattan's process for grouping games differs quite a bit from ours, for instance).

As far as missing some deductions/spending too much time on them, use this process:
Check the first rule against each other rule. Does a rule/slot/distribution in the first rule show up in another rule? If so, try to combine them. If not, move on.
Check the second rule against each subsequent rule. Does a rule/slot/distribution in the second rule show up in another rule? If so, try to combine them. If not, move on.
Check the third rule against...
etc...

A deduction is just a fancy way of saying a combination of two rules. As a general rule, you can't combine two rules that don't both talk about the same thing. So when I check for deductions, I'm literally just looking to see the same letter show up in more than one rule. It takes me about 10 seconds overall to check; add in another 30 seconds to write out the combinations. Anything longer than that and you're thinking too much about it.

The biggest take-away from the other courses is a fall back method for when you don't find all the deductions/scenarios up front. Our course focuses so much on it because we want you to spend the time to do it, but the books don't cover what to do if you miss something (which should be covered in class).

In short - do the elimination question first, the conditional questions second, and the absolute questions last. Your work from the first two question types should help you answer the absolute questions.

[iiibbystar]

Hi all,

I have taken a Blueprint course, but am still having trouble with the logic games section (in terms of missing the key inferences that would unlock the game or just plainly taking too long to make those deductions). The course was great, but I am considering reading other materials to supplement my understanding of LG. I've heard positive things from everyone, especially on this forum, about the LGB and the Manhattan LSAT, and was wondering whether or not the methods differ significantly from BP? Are the methods or diagramming systems so different that I'm better off sticking to the method I started with? I'd really appreciate any advice you can give! Thanks!

For the most part, they're not different enough that it will seem like a different language, though there are some elements that don't line up exactly (Manhattan's process for grouping games differs quite a bit from ours, for instance).

As far as missing some deductions/spending too much time on them, use this process:
Check the first rule against each other rule. Does a rule/slot/distribution in the first rule show up in another rule? If so, try to combine them. If not, move on.
Check the second rule against each subsequent rule. Does a rule/slot/distribution in the second rule show up in another rule? If so, try to combine them. If not, move on.
Check the third rule against...
etc...

A deduction is just a fancy way of saying a combination of two rules. As a general rule, you can't combine two rules that don't both talk about the same thing. So when I check for deductions, I'm literally just looking to see the same letter show up in more than one rule. It takes me about 10 seconds overall to check; add in another 30 seconds to write out the combinations. Anything longer than that and you're thinking too much about it.

The biggest take-away from the other courses is a fall back method for when you don't find all the deductions/scenarios up front. Our course focuses so much on it because we want you to spend the time to do it, but the books don't cover what to do if you miss something (which should be covered in class).

In short - do the elimination question first, the conditional questions second, and the absolute questions last. Your work from the first two question types should help you answer the absolute questions.

Thank you for your response! I appreciate it and will definitely implement the strategy for finding deductions on the next LG.