The Official September 2017 Study Group Forum

[littlewing67]

.

[Mikey]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

PT60: 170

LR: -3
LG: -0
LR: -5
RC: -3

Very unusual performance with LR, don't know where the -5 came from. This is the best I've ever done on RC :O
I know to a lot of people on here, a 170 is ehh but it's my first time breaking it so fuck off

wooooo gratz on the gains keep it up

Thanks

[Barry grandpapy]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

PT60: 170

LR: -3
LG: -0
LR: -5
RC: -3

Very unusual performance with LR, don't know where the -5 came from. This is the best I've ever done on RC :O
I know to a lot of people on here, a 170 is ehh but it's my first time breaking it so fuck off

This calls for a celebration!

[+] Spoiler

[youtube]DTfBIMK8JZ4[/youtube]

[Mikey]

This calls for a celebration!

[+] Spoiler

[youtube]DTfBIMK8JZ4[/youtube]

HAHA

[Rupert Pupkin]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

PT60: 170

LR: -3
LG: -0
LR: -5
RC: -3

Very unusual performance with LR, don't know where the -5 came from. This is the best I've ever done on RC :O
I know to a lot of people on here, a 170 is ehh but it's my first time breaking it so fuck off

Ayy!!! Congrats brotha! See, I told you with a relentless work ethic you will achieve it. Keep it up!!!

[abujabal]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

PT60: 170

LR: -3
LG: -0
LR: -5
RC: -3

Very unusual performance with LR, don't know where the -5 came from. This is the best I've ever done on RC :O
I know to a lot of people on here, a 170 is ehh but it's my first time breaking it so fuck off

Awesome! Great place to be in. IDK if you log your stuff in 7Sage, but you definitely should - it adds to the fun of breaking the 170 barrier!

[Mikey]

Ayy!!! Congrats brotha! See, I told you with a relentless work ethic you will achieve it. Keep it up!!!

Awesome! Great place to be in. IDK if you log your stuff in 7Sage, but you definitely should - it adds to the fun of breaking the 170 barrier!

thanks! and yeah I do log my stuff into 7sage. Most of my PTs are within the mid 160's range so I'm happy about this 170 lol

[creed]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

PT60: 170

LR: -3
LG: -0
LR: -5
RC: -3

Very unusual performance with LR, don't know where the -5 came from. This is the best I've ever done on RC :O
I know to a lot of people on here, a 170 is ehh but it's my first time breaking it so fuck off

Congrats!!! That's awesome. Nothing feels quite like breaking a barrier. And you have plenty of time to keep improving, too! Well done.

[Mikey]

Congrats!!! That's awesome. Nothing feels quite like breaking a barrier. And you have plenty of time to keep improving, too! Well done.

[digitality]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

Congrats, Mikey! this last week since I broke through for the first time has been by far my best week of studying. it's just so much less stressful knowing in the back of your head that you truly do have what it takes.

[Mikey]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

Congrats, Mikey! this last week since I broke through for the first time has been by far my best week of studying. it's just so much less stressful knowing in the back of your head that you truly do have what it takes.

Thanks! It definitely gives me a huge boost of confidence since I've been struggling tremendously with RC for a while and it has been the primary factor holding me back from a 170+.

[Barry grandpapy]

PT 38
LR 1: -1
RC: -3
LG: -0
LR2: -2
176

I'm really craving a marg right now.

[Mikey]

PT 38
LR 1: -1
RC: -3
LG: -0
LR2: -2
176

I'm really craving a marg right now.

NICE!

I'll prob do 62 tomorrow but idk BLAH

[caramelizedgod]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

PT60: 170

LR: -3
LG: -0
LR: -5
RC: -3

Very unusual performance with LR, don't know where the -5 came from. This is the best I've ever done on RC :O
I know to a lot of people on here, a 170 is ehh but it's my first time breaking it so fuck off

That's great! What's your aim/goal come Sept?

[Mikey]

HOLY FUCK, I FINALLY BROKE A 170 ON A PT. Beyond excited right now, OMFG.

PT60: 170

LR: -3
LG: -0
LR: -5
RC: -3

Very unusual performance with LR, don't know where the -5 came from. This is the best I've ever done on RC :O
I know to a lot of people on here, a 170 is ehh but it's my first time breaking it so fuck off

That's great! What's your aim/goal come Sept?

Anything that can get me into a T6 with some money honestly but seriously speaking, I'd be very happy with a 170.

[mmart207]

Hey guys, question here and would greatly appreciate any responses. My studying so far has consisted of purely the LSAT trainer and taking preptests. LR is by far my best section, averaging -6. This may not sound that great to some of you, but considering that I average about -8+ on LGs, LR is the least of my worries in terms of the other sections. LGs have just been absolutely killing me, and consistently keep me from reaching the scores I'd like on practice tests. I'm averaging about a 158/159 right now, with my personal best of 166, and a couple 160s. Considering that I started studying in mid May with a timed diagnostic of 144, I have come a long way. Took a practice test today and got a 158 with -11 on the LGs, I need to work this out before September. I intend on using preptests 29-60 for drilling purposes, especially games. I was wondering which book I should buy: LGB or the Manhattan LG guide? I've heard great things about both, but I have also read that Manhattan's approach to In/out games and grouping games is superior to that of the LGB, and grouping games are definitely one of my LG weaknesses. Also, I am averaging about -9 on RC and was wondering if I should also buy the Manhattan RC guide? With a little under 2 months left, what should my approach be? Given that I am a URM with a 3.69 GPA, I am aiming for a 160+ in September. I am already so close, so I just need suggestions on how to improve my LG and RC abilities, more importantly my LGs. Any help would be greatly appreciated guys!

[Rupert Pupkin]

Hey guys, question here and would greatly appreciate any responses. My studying so far has consisted of purely the LSAT trainer and taking preptests. LR is by far my best section, averaging -6. This may not sound that great to some of you, but considering that I average about -8+ on LGs, LR is the least of my worries in terms of the other sections. LGs have just been absolutely killing me, and consistently keep me from reaching the scores I'd like on practice tests. I'm averaging about a 158/159 right now, with my personal best of 166, and a couple 160s. Took a practice test today and got a 158, but considering that I was only 2 questions right away from my preferred 160 and the fact that I got -11 on the LGs, I need to work this out before September. I intend on using preptests 29-60 for drilling purposes, especially games. I was wondering which book I should buy: LGB or the Manhattan LG guide? I've heard great things about both, but I have also read that Manhattan's approach to In/out games and grouping games is superior to that of the LGB, and grouping games are definitely one of my LG weaknesses. Also, I am averaging about -9 on RC and was wondering if I should also buy the Manhattan RC guide? With a little under 2 months left, what should my approach be? Given that I am a URM with a 3.69 GPA, I am aiming for a 160+ in September. I am already so close, so I just need suggestions on how to improve my LG and RC abilities, more importantly my LGs. Any help would be greatly appreciated guys!

Since you did the Trainer I would recommend the MH because they are very similar as I believe Mike Kim helped with some MH curriculum. I used the two of these together this summer after using the bible previously and loved the stack. In addition to the MH LG book, I would use the 7Sage Fool proof method strategy when approaching logic games -- it helps a ton. Games is easy to improve on so you will def achieve your goal if you keep it up!

[mmart207]

Hey guys, question here and would greatly appreciate any responses. My studying so far has consisted of purely the LSAT trainer and taking preptests. LR is by far my best section, averaging -6. This may not sound that great to some of you, but considering that I average about -8+ on LGs, LR is the least of my worries in terms of the other sections. LGs have just been absolutely killing me, and consistently keep me from reaching the scores I'd like on practice tests. I'm averaging about a 158/159 right now, with my personal best of 166, and a couple 160s. Took a practice test today and got a 158, but considering that I was only 2 questions right away from my preferred 160 and the fact that I got -11 on the LGs, I need to work this out before September. I intend on using preptests 29-60 for drilling purposes, especially games. I was wondering which book I should buy: LGB or the Manhattan LG guide? I've heard great things about both, but I have also read that Manhattan's approach to In/out games and grouping games is superior to that of the LGB, and grouping games are definitely one of my LG weaknesses. Also, I am averaging about -9 on RC and was wondering if I should also buy the Manhattan RC guide? With a little under 2 months left, what should my approach be? Given that I am a URM with a 3.69 GPA, I am aiming for a 160+ in September. I am already so close, so I just need suggestions on how to improve my LG and RC abilities, more importantly my LGs. Any help would be greatly appreciated guys!

Since you did the Trainer I would recommend the MH because they are very similar as I believe Mike Kim helped with some MH curriculum. I used the two of these together this summer after using the bible previously and loved the stack. In addition to the MH LG book, I would use the 7Sage Fool proof method strategy when approaching logic games -- it helps a ton. Games is easy to improve on so you will def achieve your goal if you keep it up!

Thank you! Since I do not have access to a printer to print copies of games for the 7sage method, would you suggest that I just do my work on scratch paper so I can redo games that give me trouble? Since you worked through both the LGB and the Manhattan LG book, how do you think they stacked up in comparison to one another?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Hey guys, question here and would greatly appreciate any responses. My studying so far has consisted of purely the LSAT trainer and taking preptests. LR is by far my best section, averaging -6. This may not sound that great to some of you, but considering that I average about -8+ on LGs, LR is the least of my worries in terms of the other sections. LGs have just been absolutely killing me, and consistently keep me from reaching the scores I'd like on practice tests. I'm averaging about a 158/159 right now, with my personal best of 166, and a couple 160s. Took a practice test today and got a 158, but considering that I was only 2 questions right away from my preferred 160 and the fact that I got -11 on the LGs, I need to work this out before September. I intend on using preptests 29-60 for drilling purposes, especially games. I was wondering which book I should buy: LGB or the Manhattan LG guide? I've heard great things about both, but I have also read that Manhattan's approach to In/out games and grouping games is superior to that of the LGB, and grouping games are definitely one of my LG weaknesses. Also, I am averaging about -9 on RC and was wondering if I should also buy the Manhattan RC guide? With a little under 2 months left, what should my approach be? Given that I am a URM with a 3.69 GPA, I am aiming for a 160+ in September. I am already so close, so I just need suggestions on how to improve my LG and RC abilities, more importantly my LGs. Any help would be greatly appreciated guys!

Since you did the Trainer I would recommend the MH because they are very similar as I believe Mike Kim helped with some MH curriculum. I used the two of these together this summer after using the bible previously and loved the stack. In addition to the MH LG book, I would use the 7Sage Fool proof method strategy when approaching logic games -- it helps a ton. Games is easy to improve on so you will def achieve your goal if you keep it up!

Thank you! Since I do not have access to a printer to print copies of games for the 7sage method, would you suggest that I just do my work on scratch paper so I can redo games that give me trouble? Since you worked through both the LGB and the Manhattan LG book, how do you think they stacked up in comparison to one another?

Yeah scratch paper is fine if you cant make copies. Honestly, they are both awesome and people have had amazzing success with both. I wouldnt worry about it. I got more out of the MH Series maybe because it was my second time going through material though. I will say for LR & RC I liked the MH books much better. Just a personal preference though

[mmart207]

Hey guys, question here and would greatly appreciate any responses. My studying so far has consisted of purely the LSAT trainer and taking preptests. LR is by far my best section, averaging -6. This may not sound that great to some of you, but considering that I average about -8+ on LGs, LR is the least of my worries in terms of the other sections. LGs have just been absolutely killing me, and consistently keep me from reaching the scores I'd like on practice tests. I'm averaging about a 158/159 right now, with my personal best of 166, and a couple 160s. Took a practice test today and got a 158, but considering that I was only 2 questions right away from my preferred 160 and the fact that I got -11 on the LGs, I need to work this out before September. I intend on using preptests 29-60 for drilling purposes, especially games. I was wondering which book I should buy: LGB or the Manhattan LG guide? I've heard great things about both, but I have also read that Manhattan's approach to In/out games and grouping games is superior to that of the LGB, and grouping games are definitely one of my LG weaknesses. Also, I am averaging about -9 on RC and was wondering if I should also buy the Manhattan RC guide? With a little under 2 months left, what should my approach be? Given that I am a URM with a 3.69 GPA, I am aiming for a 160+ in September. I am already so close, so I just need suggestions on how to improve my LG and RC abilities, more importantly my LGs. Any help would be greatly appreciated guys!

Since you did the Trainer I would recommend the MH because they are very similar as I believe Mike Kim helped with some MH curriculum. I used the two of these together this summer after using the bible previously and loved the stack. In addition to the MH LG book, I would use the 7Sage Fool proof method strategy when approaching logic games -- it helps a ton. Games is easy to improve on so you will def achieve your goal if you keep it up!

Thank you! Since I do not have access to a printer to print copies of games for the 7sage method, would you suggest that I just do my work on scratch paper so I can redo games that give me trouble? Since you worked through both the LGB and the Manhattan LG book, how do you think they stacked up in comparison to one another?

Yeah scratch paper is fine if you cant make copies. Honestly, they are both awesome and people have had amazzing success with both. I wouldnt worry about it. I got more out of the MH Series maybe because it was my second time going through material though. I will say for LR & RC I liked the MH books much better. Just a personal preference though

I am most likely going to order the Manhattan LG guide tonight off Amazon. Would you suggest also purchasing the LR and RC guides? Or would just drilling LR and RC sections suffice? For LR, my weakness is NA, SA, and weakening questions. I don't want to buy anymore books if what I would gain from them is already in the LSAT trainer

[Rupert Pupkin]

Hey guys, question here and would greatly appreciate any responses. My studying so far has consisted of purely the LSAT trainer and taking preptests. LR is by far my best section, averaging -6. This may not sound that great to some of you, but considering that I average about -8+ on LGs, LR is the least of my worries in terms of the other sections. LGs have just been absolutely killing me, and consistently keep me from reaching the scores I'd like on practice tests. I'm averaging about a 158/159 right now, with my personal best of 166, and a couple 160s. Took a practice test today and got a 158, but considering that I was only 2 questions right away from my preferred 160 and the fact that I got -11 on the LGs, I need to work this out before September. I intend on using preptests 29-60 for drilling purposes, especially games. I was wondering which book I should buy: LGB or the Manhattan LG guide? I've heard great things about both, but I have also read that Manhattan's approach to In/out games and grouping games is superior to that of the LGB, and grouping games are definitely one of my LG weaknesses. Also, I am averaging about -9 on RC and was wondering if I should also buy the Manhattan RC guide? With a little under 2 months left, what should my approach be? Given that I am a URM with a 3.69 GPA, I am aiming for a 160+ in September. I am already so close, so I just need suggestions on how to improve my LG and RC abilities, more importantly my LGs. Any help would be greatly appreciated guys!

Since you did the Trainer I would recommend the MH because they are very similar as I believe Mike Kim helped with some MH curriculum. I used the two of these together this summer after using the bible previously and loved the stack. In addition to the MH LG book, I would use the 7Sage Fool proof method strategy when approaching logic games -- it helps a ton. Games is easy to improve on so you will def achieve your goal if you keep it up!

Thank you! Since I do not have access to a printer to print copies of games for the 7sage method, would you suggest that I just do my work on scratch paper so I can redo games that give me trouble? Since you worked through both the LGB and the Manhattan LG book, how do you think they stacked up in comparison to one another?

Yeah scratch paper is fine if you cant make copies. Honestly, they are both awesome and people have had amazzing success with both. I wouldnt worry about it. I got more out of the MH Series maybe because it was my second time going through material though. I will say for LR & RC I liked the MH books much better. Just a personal preference though

I am most likely going to order the Manhattan LG guide tonight off Amazon. Would you suggest also purchasing the LR and RC guides? Or would just drilling LR and RC sections suffice? For LR, my weakness is NA, SA, and weakening questions. I don't want to buy anymore books if what I would gain from them is already in the LSAT trainer

It can only help, especially the LR book. It complements the trainer very nicely. And if you are scoring high 150s you can definitely use more info to push you into the 160s. RC just depends on how you do RC and if you follow the forums some people dont even use a method, they just do their own thing and others rely on a book or method. Just depends on how you are scoring and how dedicated you are to improving. It would only be beneficial to you, however, for RC specifically I found the trainer to be sufficient for me... Then again I have always scored high on standardized tests in the RC portion, but others struggle immensely with it.

[mmart207]

Hey guys, question here and would greatly appreciate any responses. My studying so far has consisted of purely the LSAT trainer and taking preptests. LR is by far my best section, averaging -6. This may not sound that great to some of you, but considering that I average about -8+ on LGs, LR is the least of my worries in terms of the other sections. LGs have just been absolutely killing me, and consistently keep me from reaching the scores I'd like on practice tests. I'm averaging about a 158/159 right now, with my personal best of 166, and a couple 160s. Took a practice test today and got a 158, but considering that I was only 2 questions right away from my preferred 160 and the fact that I got -11 on the LGs, I need to work this out before September. I intend on using preptests 29-60 for drilling purposes, especially games. I was wondering which book I should buy: LGB or the Manhattan LG guide? I've heard great things about both, but I have also read that Manhattan's approach to In/out games and grouping games is superior to that of the LGB, and grouping games are definitely one of my LG weaknesses. Also, I am averaging about -9 on RC and was wondering if I should also buy the Manhattan RC guide? With a little under 2 months left, what should my approach be? Given that I am a URM with a 3.69 GPA, I am aiming for a 160+ in September. I am already so close, so I just need suggestions on how to improve my LG and RC abilities, more importantly my LGs. Any help would be greatly appreciated guys!

Since you did the Trainer I would recommend the MH because they are very similar as I believe Mike Kim helped with some MH curriculum. I used the two of these together this summer after using the bible previously and loved the stack. In addition to the MH LG book, I would use the 7Sage Fool proof method strategy when approaching logic games -- it helps a ton. Games is easy to improve on so you will def achieve your goal if you keep it up!

Thank you! Since I do not have access to a printer to print copies of games for the 7sage method, would you suggest that I just do my work on scratch paper so I can redo games that give me trouble? Since you worked through both the LGB and the Manhattan LG book, how do you think they stacked up in comparison to one another?

Yeah scratch paper is fine if you cant make copies. Honestly, they are both awesome and people have had amazzing success with both. I wouldnt worry about it. I got more out of the MH Series maybe because it was my second time going through material though. I will say for LR & RC I liked the MH books much better. Just a personal preference though

I am most likely going to order the Manhattan LG guide tonight off Amazon. Would you suggest also purchasing the LR and RC guides? Or would just drilling LR and RC sections suffice? For LR, my weakness is NA, SA, and weakening questions. I don't want to buy anymore books if what I would gain from them is already in the LSAT trainer

It can only help, especially the LR book. It complements the trainer very nicely. And if you are scoring high 150s you can definitely use more info to push you into the 160s. RC just depends on how you do RC and if you follow the forums some people dont even use a method, they just do their own thing and others rely on a book or method. Just depends on how you are scoring and how dedicated you are to improving. It would only be beneficial to you, however, for RC specifically I found the trainer to be sufficient for me... Then again I have always scored high on standardized tests in the RC portion, but others struggle immensely with it.

The only standardized test I've ever taken was the ACT and I believe I got a 28 on the RC portion, so not that great. I've also read on the forums that it's recommended to work through the Powerscore bibles first before moving onto the Manhattan guides, do you agree with that? Sorry about all of the questions! And thank you so much for being so helpful!

[Rupert Pupkin]

Hey guys, question here and would greatly appreciate any responses. My studying so far has consisted of purely the LSAT trainer and taking preptests. LR is by far my best section, averaging -6. This may not sound that great to some of you, but considering that I average about -8+ on LGs, LR is the least of my worries in terms of the other sections. LGs have just been absolutely killing me, and consistently keep me from reaching the scores I'd like on practice tests. I'm averaging about a 158/159 right now, with my personal best of 166, and a couple 160s. Took a practice test today and got a 158, but considering that I was only 2 questions right away from my preferred 160 and the fact that I got -11 on the LGs, I need to work this out before September. I intend on using preptests 29-60 for drilling purposes, especially games. I was wondering which book I should buy: LGB or the Manhattan LG guide? I've heard great things about both, but I have also read that Manhattan's approach to In/out games and grouping games is superior to that of the LGB, and grouping games are definitely one of my LG weaknesses. Also, I am averaging about -9 on RC and was wondering if I should also buy the Manhattan RC guide? With a little under 2 months left, what should my approach be? Given that I am a URM with a 3.69 GPA, I am aiming for a 160+ in September. I am already so close, so I just need suggestions on how to improve my LG and RC abilities, more importantly my LGs. Any help would be greatly appreciated guys!

Since you did the Trainer I would recommend the MH because they are very similar as I believe Mike Kim helped with some MH curriculum. I used the two of these together this summer after using the bible previously and loved the stack. In addition to the MH LG book, I would use the 7Sage Fool proof method strategy when approaching logic games -- it helps a ton. Games is easy to improve on so you will def achieve your goal if you keep it up!

Thank you! Since I do not have access to a printer to print copies of games for the 7sage method, would you suggest that I just do my work on scratch paper so I can redo games that give me trouble? Since you worked through both the LGB and the Manhattan LG book, how do you think they stacked up in comparison to one another?

Yeah scratch paper is fine if you cant make copies. Honestly, they are both awesome and people have had amazzing success with both. I wouldnt worry about it. I got more out of the MH Series maybe because it was my second time going through material though. I will say for LR & RC I liked the MH books much better. Just a personal preference though

I am most likely going to order the Manhattan LG guide tonight off Amazon. Would you suggest also purchasing the LR and RC guides? Or would just drilling LR and RC sections suffice? For LR, my weakness is NA, SA, and weakening questions. I don't want to buy anymore books if what I would gain from them is already in the LSAT trainer

It can only help, especially the LR book. It complements the trainer very nicely. And if you are scoring high 150s you can definitely use more info to push you into the 160s. RC just depends on how you do RC and if you follow the forums some people dont even use a method, they just do their own thing and others rely on a book or method. Just depends on how you are scoring and how dedicated you are to improving. It would only be beneficial to you, however, for RC specifically I found the trainer to be sufficient for me... Then again I have always scored high on standardized tests in the RC portion, but others struggle immensely with it.

The only standardized test I've ever taken was the ACT and I believe I got a 28 on the RC portion, so not that great. I've also read on the forums that it's recommended to work through the Powerscore bibles first before moving onto the Manhattan guides, do you agree with that? Sorry about all of the questions! And thank you so much for being so helpful!

Na I think the Trainer and then the Manhattan series is sufficient. I only did both because Im retaking from a yr ago. But i still reference the bibles. I would just pick one and my recc to you is MH because it follows the strategy of the trainer and go with it and review over & over again from that one book. Again, cant go wrong with either. I just liked the setup of MH better

[mmart207]

Which editions of the Manhattan guides do you have? Amazon has the 5th edition of all 3 sections for $110

[Rupert Pupkin]

My LR is the 5th edition and My LR/RC is actually the 4th lol because I bought them a while before the LR book.