The Official October 2015 Study Group

How many PTs have you done? (timed)

0+
5
4%
5+
12
10%
10+
25
21%
15+
14
12%
20+
20
17%
25+
9
7%
30+
3
2%
35+
33
27%
 
Total votes: 121

User avatar
Mint-Berry_Crunch
Posts: 5006
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 1:20 am

Post removed...

Postby Mint-Berry_Crunch » Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:26 am

Post removed...
Last edited by Mint-Berry_Crunch on Fri Jan 01, 2016 12:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
flash21
Posts: 1536
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby flash21 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:11 pm

Which Lr was fake

User avatar
Sera Numquam
Posts: 692
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 3:58 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby Sera Numquam » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:19 pm

I'M FREE.

RC
LR
LR
LG
LR

I feel good. How does everyone else feel?
I hope my first LR was fake though.

npt2901
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 9:37 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby npt2901 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:35 pm

.
Last edited by npt2901 on Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

npt2901
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 9:37 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby npt2901 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:37 pm

.
Last edited by npt2901 on Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
gatesome
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 7:43 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby gatesome » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:48 pm

npt2901 wrote:Please say the 26 question one was fake


Oasis thread seems confident that real was 25/26 (but if you had 2x 26 one was exp.)

Other guy: 26, 26, 25
Me: 25, 25, 26

npt2901
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 9:37 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby npt2901 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:49 pm

.
Last edited by npt2901 on Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

asd401
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:47 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby asd401 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:50 pm

does anyone know if the LG where there were it was mod edit: do not state what kind of game was involved this is your only warning i think
Last edited by asd401 on Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sera Numquam
Posts: 692
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 3:58 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby Sera Numquam » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:51 pm

asd401 wrote:does anyone know if the LG where there were two consecutive L's but L could not be with G was real or experimental? it was an advanced linear i think

That was real!

User avatar
gatesome
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 7:43 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby gatesome » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:52 pm

asd401 wrote:does anyone know if the LG where there were [...]


Real.
Last edited by gatesome on Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

npt2901
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 9:37 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby npt2901 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:53 pm

.
Last edited by npt2901 on Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sera Numquam
Posts: 692
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 3:58 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby Sera Numquam » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:58 pm

I hate having LR experimental because it's hard to figure out which one it is. I figured out it was one with 26 questions, but other than I'm not sure.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22822
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:07 pm

I'm late posting this, but, please READ AND HEED the rules below:
TLS Moderators wrote::o This is a warning. This is likely your only warning; you are unlikely to receive any further warnings.

Please be advised that discussion or solicitation (including, but not limited to, PMs and online chatrooms) of any questions or answers from the September 2014 LSAT with anything more than an extremely broad level of specificity will result in a temporary or permanent ban. This may include a permanent ban on your IPs if necessary, which will block you from even viewing the TLS forums. Permanent IP address bans for LSAT discussion have been issued in the past.

Examples have been included for your reference below. This is not an exhaustive list. It is not a defense to say that your overly-specific discussion of an LSAT question did not exactly mirror one of the examples - you will still be banned. Linking to other online materials/discussion of the LSAT questions is also prohibited.

Please note that you agreed not to discuss specific LSAT questions and answers when you completed your signing statement when taking the test. The LSAC considers it a violation to discuss specific questions and answers; the LSAC will act accordingly upon discovering discussion of specific questions and answers. Be advised that the LSAC and its agents monitor this board.

Analytical Reasoning Example wrote:1. Games were hard. Okay.
2. Yeah, on the second question for the second game, I wasn't sure if C was just on Tuesdays or Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Ban.
3. No, the order is ACDBBE. Ban.
4. What about Question Four? If C can't go on Tuesdays, then it has to be Wednesday right? Ban.
5. You guys are stupid. The answer to Question Four and Five is D. Ban.
6. No, the answers are CDAABE. Ban.
7. C'mon guys. How can you not know all of the answers? Ban.

Logical Reasoning Example wrote:1. I thought the LR sections weren't too difficult. Okay.
2. What answers did you all get for the coffee growers question? Ban.
3. I got A. Ban.
4. That's weird, I thought it was either B or D. Ban.
5. But it was a parallel reasoning problem. Ban.
6. Damn it, I knew I should have picked B. Ban.
7. Hold on guys, I think the mods might get upset if we keep this up. Never a good sign.
8. Let's trick them by disguising what we're saying. So, hypothetically, if I were a coffee grower..... Ban.
9. You would be displeased with government regulation of pesticides. Ban.
10. But not price controls. Ban.
11. Is that because, hypothetically, price controls would raise prices and revenue? Ban.
12. It's just a cost problem in general. If you were a coffee grower, the legal pesticides would, hypothetically, cost more. Ban.
13. Whoa, it's just like Question 13 from the second LR section in PT 39. Ban.
14. Guys, maybe we should create a chatroom to discuss this. I started one: tinychat.com/letscheatontheLSAT Ban.
15. If you guys could PM me about this, that'd be great. Ban.

Please note that this warning applies to the Reading Comprehension section as well as the writing sample.

If you are in doubt as to whether your drafted post will run afoul of this warning, do not submit the post. You have been warned.


Mods will be reviewing these threads and will issue bans for violation of the above rules. This is your only warning. Thanks.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22822
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:11 pm

Like, don't do this:

asd401 wrote:does anyone know if the LG where there were it was mod edit: do not state what kind of game was involved this is your only warning i think

User avatar
CoolerThanCooley
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 12:17 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby CoolerThanCooley » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:19 pm

I completely bombed. Hell, I may have done even worse on this test than I had done on my diagnostic. I had to guess on a bunch of the questions at the end of RC, and I was too nervous to focus during the LR sections.

Time for me to switch to the December Study Group, I guess. *sigh*

It sure hurts to see one's dreams postponed. Hope you guys had a much better experience than I did.

Ag21ag21
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:26 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby Ag21ag21 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:31 pm

Ok, still trying to figure out which LR was fake.
One of mine was 26 questions long and had two questions about the same prompt! This seemed unusual to me... So i think it may be experimental. Can anyone confirm if the two real LRs didn't have two questions about one prompt?

User avatar
gatesome
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 7:43 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby gatesome » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:33 pm

Ag21ag21 wrote:Ok, still trying to figure out which LR was fake.
One of mine was 26 questions long and had two questions about the same prompt! This seemed unusual to me... So i think it may be experimental. Can anyone confirm if the two real LRs didn't have two questions about one prompt?


I also has this, in section 2 (I think) or 3, one of which was for sure exp.

alydeee
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:42 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby alydeee » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:45 pm

-sigh- had LR LG RC LR LG (3rd game was tough)

MischiefManaged16
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 3:04 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby MischiefManaged16 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:45 pm

Ag21ag21 wrote:Ok, still trying to figure out which LR was fake.
One of mine was 26 questions long and had two questions about the same prompt! This seemed unusual to me... So i think it may be experimental. Can anyone confirm if the two real LRs didn't have two questions about one prompt?


nope did not have that, that must've been exp.

User avatar
gatesome
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 7:43 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby gatesome » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:50 pm

MischiefManaged16 wrote:
Ag21ag21 wrote:Ok, still trying to figure out which LR was fake.
One of mine was 26 questions long and had two questions about the same prompt! This seemed unusual to me... So i think it may be experimental. Can anyone confirm if the two real LRs didn't have two questions about one prompt?


nope did not have that, that must've been exp.


Interesting. Did you have a question about hairless dogs from Mexico/Peru?

MischiefManaged16
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 3:04 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby MischiefManaged16 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:55 pm

gatesome wrote:
MischiefManaged16 wrote:
Ag21ag21 wrote:Ok, still trying to figure out which LR was fake.
One of mine was 26 questions long and had two questions about the same prompt! This seemed unusual to me... So i think it may be experimental. Can anyone confirm if the two real LRs didn't have two questions about one prompt?


nope did not have that, that must've been exp.


Interesting. Did you have a question about hairless dogs from Mexico/Peru?


yes, that was real

User avatar
204Wpg
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 4:46 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby 204Wpg » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:57 pm

gatesome wrote:
MischiefManaged16 wrote:
Ag21ag21 wrote:Ok, still trying to figure out which LR was fake.
One of mine was 26 questions long and had two questions about the same prompt! This seemed unusual to me... So i think it may be experimental. Can anyone confirm if the two real LRs didn't have two questions about one prompt?


nope did not have that, that must've been exp.


Interesting. Did you have a question about hairless dogs from Mexico/Peru?


That was real - I had two RCs and I remember that one on my LR.

npt2901
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 9:37 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby npt2901 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:30 pm

.
Last edited by npt2901 on Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ag21ag21
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:26 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby Ag21ag21 » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:58 pm

gatesome wrote:
MischiefManaged16 wrote:
Ag21ag21 wrote:Ok, still trying to figure out which LR was fake.
One of mine was 26 questions long and had two questions about the same prompt! This seemed unusual to me... So i think it may be experimental. Can anyone confirm if the two real LRs didn't have two questions about one prompt?


nope did not have that, that must've been exp.


Interesting. Did you have a question about hairless dogs from Mexico/Peru?



Yes. Don't remember which LR this question was though.

LawurmStudent
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: The Official October 2015 Study Group

Postby LawurmStudent » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:55 pm

Does anyone remember total number of constraints on second real LG. I was thinking 4 but I cannot recall.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BobBoblaw, Yahoo [Bot] and 8 guests