## PT68, game 3, Voicemails

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
dontsaywhatyoumean

Posts: 265
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:35 pm

### PT68, game 3, Voicemails

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsa ... -4-game-3/

7Sage there uses V, W and I, T, S as his categories.

When I did the game I used 1, 2, 3, and V, W as my categories. (1, 2 and 3 seemed to provide inherent ordering.)

His seemed better when I redid it, but it was also a redo, so that could have been why it seemed more effective.

How are you supposed to know which to group by (which will be most effective)?

kindofcanuck

Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:47 am

### Re: PT68, game 3, Voicemails

I did it like your link (but flipped - W and V vertical, IST horizontal) making a 3x2 grid to put the numbers in.

This is the most sensible way to do it because you want to keep your axes fixed - you'll always be looking at finding WV properties for each of IST, so want the numbers for Iw, Iv, Sw, Sv, Tw and Tv.

Because some of these are required by rules to be the same as, or smaller than each other, it's easiest to show in that grid. Your way isn't invalid, but would need more constant checking back, leading to more room for error and harder to draw the inferences.

dontsaywhatyoumean

Posts: 265
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:35 pm

### Re: PT68, game 3, Voicemails

kindofcanuck wrote:I did it like your link (but flipped - W and V vertical, IST horizontal) making a 3x2 grid to put the numbers in.

This is the most sensible way to do it because you want to keep your axes fixed - you'll always be looking at finding WV properties for each of IST, so want the numbers for Iw, Iv, Sw, Sv, Tw and Tv.

Because some of these are required by rules to be the same as, or smaller than each other, it's easiest to show in that grid. Your way isn't invalid, but would need more constant checking back, leading to more room for error and harder to draw the inferences.

The way you two did it is how I've seen it done on two other sites too.

I got all the answers right, but it did take quite a bit of time, as you said, constant checking back. That's what it felt like.

So basically, use the variables as the game pieces, and don't put them on the axises? That's what you're saying?

It seems to make sense.

But for a linear game, you'd obviously put 1,2,3 as the base, even if one of them wasn't necessarily filled. You wouldn't put the game pieces as the x axis.

I know in practice both different methods seem to be most appropriate for their respective games, but I can't figure out a way to explain to myself in words the supposed difference in the reasoning behind the approach in the choice of axis (and axes) between the two types of games.

Because when I did it, it felt very much like a linear game, which apparently may have hurt me, but normally would help.