The Official September 2014 Study Group Forum

Learn_Live_Hope · Post by **Learn_Live_Hope** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 4:26 pm

dasani13 wrote:PT 65 - 169

LR -0
LG -2
RC -11
LR -2

It was kind of exciting to take a PT at the test center and I think that kinda helped me stay focused the whole time. The 2nd LR felt tougher than the first (some tricky answer choices) but I felt good about both. The fourth game was a beast compared to the first three but still very manageable if I hadn't wasted so much time right when I got to it.

Great job dasani!!!!

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 4:34 pm

Wow I was away from my phone all day n come back to see sum awesome scores. Congrats all.

I was at a mud run, so once I clean the mud out of my mouth, eyes ears hair and god knows where else I'll be on the studying train 2

AOT · Post by **AOT** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 5:30 pm

Just took PT 71, which I sat in December.

LR1 -2
LG -8
LR2 -0
RC -1

Not a huge improvement on my previous score, which is frustrating. The one thing that makes me feel better is that the games made much more sense and felt much easier. I just rushed through the first two, hoping to come back to them to double check things afterwards, but then misread a rule in the third game, which ate up all my time. Hopefully, if I no longer have to worry so much about timing, I can start to focus on just being careful. Pretty sure my set up and method were correct, but going to do a proper review later.

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 5:57 pm

On my break during PT 63. What did we say were the more difficult tests in the 60s? I remember it being mentioned that like 64 was super easy or something and that 61 and 62 were super hard?

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 5:59 pm

sfoglia wrote:On my break during PT 63. What did we say were the more difficult tests in the 60s? I remember it being mentioned that like 64 was super easy or something and that 61 and 62 were super hard?

I thought 61 wasn't too bad. 62 is pretty notorious for having devastating games n RC but I haven't done it

fra · Post by **fra** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 6:17 pm

Took pt 62 this morning, and my score was not as good as desired.

Sweet baby Jesus, stained glass logic game. It's the second game in the section, and I was about half way done on it (on question 10 I think?) and I looked at my watch and saw that I was 20 minutes into the section. Ridiculous.

I need to get serious about practice again. I've been slacking.
I think that after I do really well on an exam I get sloppy on the next one.

schmelling · Post by **schmelling** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:02 pm

Post removed.

ghostofdreams · Post by **ghostofdreams** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:13 pm

misreading a simple rule

flipping out

~~flipping out~~

~~misreading a simple rule~~

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:15 pm

This is a lady grey call out

U must b an f'ing genius bc superPT B has minus 15 curve and IMHO has two of the hardest NA Qs in sec 1, almost back to back, with one being like a freaking riddle. I did not love it. And I didn't take the full PT just used some of the sections for practice/acted as experimentals.

But for real grey I mean yeah a -15 curve is cool but like I think the -15 is totally justified and like shouldn't give anyone a sense of comfort

gnomgnomuch · Post by **gnomgnomuch** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:38 pm

went 67/73 on level 3 and level 4 MBT questions today.

Considering the last time I did level 3 and 4 questions, I was more like 35/70 I'm very happy about this.

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:39 pm

Okay, I never actually post my PT scores here, but...

169 on PT 63, which I felt like it was SO easy. There was a passage on Kate Chopin; I mean, I feel like there's just no way this is an accurate reflection of my scoring, right? But then of my past five tests, this is my third 169 (my most recent two were above mid 60s but not quite high 60s). So maybe it is accurate? But, if it is, WTF is wrong with me that I can't seem to get just one more question right and hit 170?

I don't know. This really should have been my 170+ PT, if there is one. Kate Chopin! It just doesn't count at all, and I'm disappointed that this PT had to have this passage and I'm so annoyed for not hitting 170, and at the same time so grateful that I didn't score in the mid 160s again.

Breakdown:
LR1: -4
LG: -2 (I don't know what this is about, haven't looked.)
LREx.: -2 (Of course I do best on the section that doesn't count.)
LR2: -4
RC: -2 (Stupid oceanography/geography grossness. Lamest sciences there are!)

ETA: I realize that none of this makes sense because hysterics. So, TLDR: very mixed feelings about PT63.

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:42 pm

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
sfoglia wrote:On my break during PT 63. What did we say were the more difficult tests in the 60s? I remember it being mentioned that like 64 was super easy or something and that 61 and 62 were super hard?
I thought 61 wasn't too bad. 62 is pretty notorious for having devastating games n RC but I haven't done it

I really need to retake 62 for practice. That was my second test and a 160 and I was so devastated that I don't think I even bothered to review it. Maybe I'll break it up into sections to use this week.

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:47 pm

Fogs IMO that's a pretty solid breakdown. Obvs if u went -2 on games then you just made two dumb mistakes (which happens to everyone--I missed #4 on the games from 69 today, only one I missed, felt really dumb), and you can def go -0 on LG. Have u went -0 on lg yet?

Also going -2 on RC is really freaking solid too. Again clearly you had a good grasp of all the passages. What were the questions like that you missed?

And IMHO I think -4,-4 on LR is pretty damn good. I know a lot of ppl ITT regularly post -0 on LR but LR is not east by any means, it's a very diverse section and is crazy challenging.

So really if you're consistently going around -4 on each LR, and around those scores on lg and RC, with like a little bit more consistency you will be in the magical land of fucking 170s.

Let's also not forget that a 169 is like, what, the ~96th percentile? So it's easy to look at a 169 n b like wow just a 169 when u see ppl posting 172+ on the reg here, but a 169 is no joke.

schmelling · Post by **schmelling** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:57 pm

Post removed.

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 8:37 pm

schmelling wrote:I agree with Bill here, Sfog. Scoring in this zone is where the magic happens. If you drill your weaknesses, you're a shoe in for the 170s.

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 8:44 pm

BillPackets wrote:Fogs IMO that's a pretty solid breakdown. Obvs if u went -2 on games then you just made two dumb mistakes (which happens to everyone--I missed #4 on the games from 69 today, only one I missed, felt really dumb), and you can def go -0 on LG. Have u went -0 on lg yet?

Also going -2 on RC is really freaking solid too. Again clearly you had a good grasp of all the passages. What were the questions like that you missed?

And IMHO I think -4,-4 on LR is pretty damn good. I know a lot of ppl ITT regularly post -0 on LR but LR is not east by any means, it's a very diverse section and is crazy challenging.

So really if you're consistently going around -4 on each LR, and around those scores on lg and RC, with like a little bit more consistency you will be in the magical land of fucking 170s.

Let's also not forget that a 169 is like, what, the ~96th percentile? So it's easy to look at a 169 n b like wow just a 169 when u see ppl posting 172+ on the reg here, but a 169 is no joke.

schmelling wrote:I agree with Bill here, Sfog. Scoring in this zone is where the magic happens. If you drill your weaknesses, you're a shoe in for the 170s.

I hope you two are right. I just need like four more points and then I'll feel like this September LSAT can happen for me. Thank you for the support!

I have not gone -0 on LG yet, Bill. I haven't gone -0 on anything! I actually have not gotten less than -2 on any single section. I'm always thinking, "This will be the day I am -1 on LR or RC or LG," but nope.

Not really any discernible pattern of error for LR, except that I really didn't think I got most of these wrong while I was answering them. That concerns me.

For RC, one was just a stupid mistake. Misread the question and answered the opposite. The other was some strongly supported that was just not going to happen for me. None of the answer choices looked remotely correct. I need to review that entire passage, definitely.

IDK, I've been focusing on bringing my LR up mostly this past week. I'm going to be more balanced from here out. I don't know how much more gain I can make on LR; it's just not clicking for me right now.

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 9:06 pm

You are like a quarter of a thought away from going -0 on a section...IMHO it's easy to miss 1 or 2 on lg w forgetting some rule in a diagram but you will definitely get it.

Also, what type of Qs did u miss on LR? Assumption family or non assumption fam?

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 9:32 pm

BillPackets wrote:You are like a quarter of a thought away from going -0 on a section...IMHO it's easy to miss 1 or 2 on lg w forgetting some rule in a diagram but you will definitely get it.

Also, what type of Qs did u miss on LR? Assumption family or non assumption fam?

LR is just really frwakin hard to -0. The times I've went -1 it was just not thinking for a split second and picking a dumb answer choice or a very complicated parallel flaw or flaw

Read: the smallest mistake will keep you from going perfect on an LR section

diiggidy · Post by **diiggidy** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 9:54 pm

Took PT 63 today.

LR1 (-4)
RC1 Exp (-4)
LG (-3)
LR2 (-6)
RC (-2)

For a 167. PTs have been very frustrating for me lately. I thought this reading section was very difficult, at least the literature one about Chopin, but got my highest score to date for RC. Also, I'm getting significantly worse at LR. It used to be my best section (around 3-5 off overall), but my scores have gone done quite a bit. I mostly get the level 4 and 5 from the 7sage ratings wrong, but can't seem to fix the problem. Should I drill level 3's or 4's of strengthen/weaken, flaw, NA (I haven't done this yet), or is there a better strategy this close to the test?

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 9:55 pm

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
BillPackets wrote:You are like a quarter of a thought away from going -0 on a section...IMHO it's easy to miss 1 or 2 on lg w forgetting some rule in a diagram but you will definitely get it.

Also, what type of Qs did u miss on LR? Assumption family or non assumption fam?

LR is just really frwakin hard to -0. The times I've went -1 it was just not thinking for a split second and picking a dumb answer choice or a very complicated parallel flaw or flaw

Read: the smallest mistake will keep you from going perfect on an LR section

Err, I have never even broken down LR that way before. I don't think of questions as being Assumption Family or non. Is that strange? Maybe that's my problem. I'm half and half, overall, I think, across PTs. Here's my breakdown for 63:

LR 1
2 Parallel Reasoning
1 Point of Issue (5/5 difficulty, so whatever.)
1 Must Be True

LR2
2 Strengthen
1 Flaw
1 Sufficient Assumption

Parallel Reasoning will be my next Cambridge. IDK what to do about Strengthen and Weaken at this point. I'm just a disaster with those two. Will be re-reading The LSAT Trainer's LR sections with the hope that third time is a charm (I've read the whole book twice).

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:13 pm

sfoglia wrote:
Err, I have never even broken down LR that way before. I don't think of questions as being Assumption Family or non. Is that strange? Maybe that's my problem. I'm half and half, overall, I think, across PTs. Here's my breakdown for 63:

LR 1
2 Parallel Reasoning
1 Point of Issue (5/5 difficulty, so whatever.)
1 Must Be True

LR2
2 Strengthen
1 Flaw
1 Sufficient Assumption

Parallel Reasoning will be my next Cambridge. IDK what to do about Strengthen and Weaken at this point. I'm just a disaster with those two. Will be re-reading The LSAT Trainer's LR sections with the hope that third time is a charm (I've read the whole book twice).

Yeah Idk I think of assumption fam (flaw/strengthen/weaken/NA/SA/principle justify) and non assumption fam (point, method, paradox, MBT, MSS, inference).

But that is a pretty even breakdown...what's up w the strengthen/weaken? Is there a particular trap answer that you fall for? A particular correct answer choice that you have a hard time picking up on?

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:22 pm

BillPackets wrote:
sfoglia wrote:
Err, I have never even broken down LR that way before. I don't think of questions as being Assumption Family or non. Is that strange? Maybe that's my problem. I'm half and half, overall, I think, across PTs. Here's my breakdown for 63:

LR 1
2 Parallel Reasoning
1 Point of Issue (5/5 difficulty, so whatever.)
1 Must Be True

LR2
2 Strengthen
1 Flaw
1 Sufficient Assumption

Parallel Reasoning will be my next Cambridge. IDK what to do about Strengthen and Weaken at this point. I'm just a disaster with those two. Will be re-reading The LSAT Trainer's LR sections with the hope that third time is a charm (I've read the whole book twice).
Yeah Idk I think of assumption fam (flaw/strengthen/weaken/NA/SA/principle justify) and non assumption fam (point, method, paradox, MBT, MSS, inference).

But that is a pretty even breakdown...what's up w the strengthen/weaken? Is there a particular trap answer that you fall for? A particular correct answer choice that you have a hard time picking up on?

Not that I've noticed! They're never harder than level 3, too. I don't know how I miss them. I've been organizing all of my incorrect answers in a notebook and then adding them to a word document, anyway. Maybe some sort of pattern will emerge soon.

The only thing that I can say I've noticed is that I ALWAYS get at least one incorrect answer on the final two pages. I'm sure that fatigue has something to do with it, but I've been trying to be overly conscious and to read carefully for the past three or four PTs and it hasn't helped. I star all strengthen/weaken question to remind myself to double-check my answer and I work very slowly on all questions #20+, but, still no.

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:23 pm

diiggidy wrote:Took PT 63 today.

LR1 (-4)
RC1 Exp (-4)
LG (-3)
LR2 (-6)
RC (-2)

For a 167. PTs have been very frustrating for me lately. I thought this reading section was very difficult, at least the literature one about Chopin, but got my highest score to date for RC. Also, I'm getting significantly worse at LR. It used to be my best section (around 3-5 off overall), but my scores have gone done quite a bit. I mostly get the level 4 and 5 from the 7sage ratings wrong, but can't seem to fix the problem. Should I drill level 3's or 4's of strengthen/weaken, flaw, NA (I haven't done this yet), or is there a better strategy this close to the test?

Hiii, we took the same PT today and scored very similarly. I don't have an answer for you because I am having the same issues, but wanted to acknowledge. Hopefully we'll both perform to satisfaction on our next PTs!

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:25 pm

Well when you get into the post 16 range the Qs get more difficult.

You should def see if u can find some sort of pattern w the strengthen/weaken. Did u do all the drilling packets ?

Gray · Post by **Gray** » Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:34 pm