Top Law Schools

.

The dinosaur game is an unequivocal in/out game with the U V being the most important IMHO FTR

smccgrey wrote:

hetookmetoamovie wrote: It won't be long before I can post gifs. Just you wait.

You should embrace the lounge.

I literally have never cast my eyes below the LSAT Prep Forum.

smccgrey wrote:

hetookmetoamovie wrote: It won't be long before I can post gifs. Just you wait.

You should embrace the lounge.

I support the loungization of this thread

hetookmetoamovie wrote:Skrillex.

Edit: jk I think Skrillex would make me drive into a tree.

"Hopeful 0L dies en route to LSAT examination due to an overdose of EDM and negligent use of dub step "

hetookmetoamovie wrote:

smccgrey wrote:

hetookmetoamovie wrote: It won't be long before I can post gifs. Just you wait.

You should embrace the lounge.

I literally have never cast my eyes below the LSAT Prep Forum.

Then we own u

Edit: I don't lounge during the day, it's just easier to leave this page up on my phone n refresh when I'm busy workin n stuff

.

smccgrey wrote:The lounge is basically this thread without any lsat talk.

Insane, hilarious and occasionally generally terrifying.

Ftfy

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:

hetookmetoamovie wrote:Skrillex.

Edit: jk I think Skrillex would make me drive into a tree.

"Hopeful 0L dies en route to LSAT examination due to an overdose of EDM and negligent use of dub step "

BillPackets wrote:

smccgrey wrote:

hetookmetoamovie wrote: It won't be long before I can post gifs. Just you wait.

You should embrace the lounge.

I support the loungization of this thread

IMHO "loungization" is great parlance to come from this thread

Insanity, hilarity, and terror are what I look for in my friends, so it should work out.

This thread started the loungization of the on topics

Wonder what this thread was like b4 certain de-railers became active

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:

hetookmetoamovie wrote:Skrillex.

Edit: jk I think Skrillex would make me drive into a tree.

"Hopeful 0L dies en route to LSAT examination due to an overdose of EDM and negligent use of dub step "

Driving While Wubbing

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:Wonder what this thread was like b4 certain de-railers became active

De railers is great

hetookmetoamovie wrote:

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:

hetookmetoamovie wrote:Skrillex.

Edit: jk I think Skrillex would make me drive into a tree.

"Hopeful 0L dies en route to LSAT examination due to an overdose of EDM and negligent use of dub step "

Driving While Wubbing

Okay nbd I lol'd

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:Wonder what this thread was like b4 certain de-railers became active

Lots of people just posting their scores. Some boring shit.

sfoglia wrote:

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:Wonder what this thread was like b4 certain de-railers became active

Lots of people just posting their scores. Some boring shit.

It seems much more legit now

Had dinos game today. I shit the bed for sure. Tbh though I consider my results on the section an accurate represenation of what would happen if I actually did get a game like that as Game #3, because I actually tried it to the best of my abilites first before just going straight to game #4.

Also- generally when there is a hard game like that which takes like 13 minutes or something the rest of the games are pretty easy. I found game #4 fairly challenging though- not hard, but just time consuming.

hereisonehand wrote:

alloverthat wrote:
am I really the only one still freaking about logic games? It's bumming me out how everyone seems to be saying it's the easiest to go -0 on, and I manage that pretty much never.

Just keep doing 'em. Really. First you need to be able to go perfect untimed, then you do, say, another 100 games, by which point you should be able to go perfect (or near perfect) in time.

See, this is what I don't get. There are something like ~250 total LG drills out there, right? So if you drill out 100, then you're familiarising yourself with some from virtually every PT. And if you're familiar, then it's tough to score that accurately. What am I missing here?

msp8 wrote:

hereisonehand wrote:

alloverthat wrote:
am I really the only one still freaking about logic games? It's bumming me out how everyone seems to be saying it's the easiest to go -0 on, and I manage that pretty much never.

Just keep doing 'em. Really. First you need to be able to go perfect untimed, then you do, say, another 100 games, by which point you should be able to go perfect (or near perfect) in time.

See, this is what I don't get. There are something like ~250 total LG drills out there, right? So if you drill out 100, then you're familiarising yourself with some from virtually every PT. And if you're familiar, then it's tough to score that accurately. What am I missing here?

I bought the Cambridge packets which breaks down by type the games from tests 1-39. I drilled all of these, some a few times, and never really timed any of them. I've done all the sections from PT 40-61 since. I've been able a to finish every section between 25 and 32/33 minutes and I can guarantee I couldn't have done this before drilling those 160 or so games.

Also I can't believe it was only until the recent tests that LSAC gave you more space for Logic Games. PT 57 G4 has virtually no room for any diagramming.

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:

msp8 wrote:
See, this is what I don't get. There are something like ~250 total LG drills out there, right? So if you drill out 100, then you're familiarising yourself with some from virtually every PT. And if you're familiar, then it's tough to score that accurately. What am I missing here?

I bought the Cambridge packets which breaks down by type the games from tests 1-39. I drilled all of these, some a few times, and never really timed any of them. I've done all the sections from PT 40-61 since. I've been able a to finish every section between 25 and 32/33 minutes and I can guarantee I couldn't have done this before drilling those 160 or so games.

Interesting. I've been debating whether to go that route, or keep down my current route (which is to take full PTs, and then thoroughly review everything). My time on LR (and RC) still sucks though, hence the debate. I suppose I'll try my current method for a few more PTs and if I don't see tangible gains, switch over to breaking it down by type.

Thanks for your feedback!

msp8 wrote:

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:

msp8 wrote:
See, this is what I don't get. There are something like ~250 total LG drills out there, right? So if you drill out 100, then you're familiarising yourself with some from virtually every PT. And if you're familiar, then it's tough to score that accurately. What am I missing here?

I bought the Cambridge packets which breaks down by type the games from tests 1-39. I drilled all of these, some a few times, and never really timed any of them. I've done all the sections from PT 40-61 since. I've been able a to finish every section between 25 and 32/33 minutes and I can guarantee I couldn't have done this before drilling those 160 or so games.

Interesting. I've been debating whether to go that route, or keep down my current route (which is to take full PTs, and then thoroughly review everything). My time on LR (and RC) still sucks though, hence the debate. I suppose I'll try my current method for a few more PTs and if I don't see tangible gains, switch over to breaking it down by type.

Thanks for your feedback!

R u gunnin for the sept test?

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
R u gunnin for the sept test?

I had been. But I'm far behind where I should be in my studying, and so I'm leaning toward Dec. I can dedicate a lot of time to studying for the next few weeks, and I score well (untimed), but I'm still way too slow. I'm giving myself another ~10 days to improve speed and, if it doesn't get to an acceptable level (and then prove that I can maintain that speed consistently thereafter), then I'll take Dec instead.