How'd it go? Forum

[egilb]

Agreed. I spent way too much time on that stupid bridge question. Still not sure.

+1

what was up with that stupid question?

[keg411]

From what I have heard the curves are set over 3 are so years based on experimentals, thus they don't really shift because of the real test.

That is what I used to think, but the December curve seemed to match the test.

What do you mean exactly? The December test was curved the way it was because the test was substantially harder than usual.

That's what I was saying. The other poster thought the December test was curved harder because of past 3 experimental scores and it had nothing to do with the difficulty.

[vampy]

I thought the LG was very tough, probably even harder than the December 2009 LG which was the toughest in years. It looks like LSAC has found a way to write LG questions that can't be easily solved by wrote.

With that said, I think I got all of the LG right but there was a ton of room for error.

[eros]

Agreed. I spent way too much time on that stupid bridge question. Still not sure.

+1

what was up with that stupid question?

second that! i knew i was in for a rough section when that was like the 4th question in...

[npodlask11]

Agreed. I spent way too much time on that stupid bridge question. Still not sure.

+1

what was up with that stupid question?

second that! i knew i was in for a rough section when that was like the 4th question in...

i agree as well. that took 3x as long to do for some reason...i really want to ask what you guys answered, but i am afraid LSAC is lurkin about waitin to catch unsuspecting test takers.

[gatorhoosier]

What was the game everyone is referencing as the "terms" game about again? Just trying to jog the memory and remember which one that was..

M

[egilb]

agreed. plus, i spent so much time on it that i'm not sure i could tell you what i answered without having my memory of each choice refreshed. ugh! i'm an idiot--that question cost me the last question of the section.

[charlesxavier]

What was the game everyone is referencing as the "terms" game about again? Just trying to jog the memory and remember which one that was..

Matching classes and terms.

I am having trouble remembering one of the games. There was class/term, that dreadful piece of crap with the juicer and then the last game which was a bunch of cond. rules. What was the other game(I think it was game #2)?

Hiking was game 1 of that section for me. I believe.

[becauseimaddicted]

What was the game everyone is referencing as the "terms" game about again? Just trying to jog the memory and remember which one that was..

Matching classes and terms.

I am having trouble remembering one of the games. There was class/term, that dreadful piece of crap with the juicer and then the last game which was a bunch of cond. rules. What was the other game(I think it was game #2)?

Trails. I didn't think games was all that bad. I found RC and the second LR more difficult, and games is usually my weakest section.

[gatorhoosier]

Agreed. I spent way too much time on that stupid bridge question. Still not sure.

+1

what was up with that stupid question?

second that! i knew i was in for a rough section when that was like the 4th question in...

I

[Thirteen]

Fuck logic games, and fuck the bridge question. Also, the guy next to me should have taken a shower this morning (hell, he should have taken one this week). That is all.

[idkmybffjill]

Trying to remember the matching classes game vs. the hiking game...they're both blurry. Can anybody refresh my memory please? I remember well the juicer game and the author/book chapters game.

[egilb]

wow. i can't even articulate a coherent sentence. embarrassing.

i didn't find the games too difficult compared to dec. nobody thought the last logic game sucked? i thought it was the worst, but i had to do it in four minutes. i'm worthless after the five minute warning. all i can think about is only having five minutes left.

[gatorhoosier]

What was the game everyone is referencing as the "terms" game about again? Just trying to jog the memory and remember which one that was..

Matching classes and terms.

I am having trouble remembering one of the games. There was class/term, that dreadful piece of crap with the juicer and then the last game which was a bunch of cond. rules. What was the other game(I think it was game #2)?

Trails. I didn't think games was all that bad. I found RC and the second LR more difficult, and games is usually my weakest section.

AH

[goosey]

What was the game everyone is referencing as the "terms" game about again? Just trying to jog the memory and remember which one that was..

Matching classes and terms.

I am having trouble remembering one of the games. There was class/term, that dreadful piece of crap with the juicer and then the last game which was a bunch of cond. rules. What was the other game(I think it was game #2)?

the juicer mixer game had one very obvious inference that kind of made the game a bit easier. I think the games werent necc hard, just a litttle odd. and when I saw oaks and spruces I had a dejavu moment from that one tree game with the parks..I was like whaaaat. then I realized its a different game haha.

I ran out of time on the last game and had to guess 3 questions. poo I hope I got the ones I did right, that would really help me out.

the last rc passage was weird as hell and I guessed on most of the questions. rc is usually my good section. lr1 seemed unusually easy and lr2 seemed medium.

i predict:

best case:
lg: -5
lr1: -0
lr2: -4
rc: -7

worst case:

lg: -8
lr1: -4
lr2: -6
rc: -8

I am retaking a double 161 here...need to not only get higher, but get more than a few points higher. oh goodddd

[Feb-LSAT=yuck]

As you can see from my username, i joined just to commiserate with other February LSAT takers who weren't so pumped about their results...

As others mentioned, the LG seemed impossibly hard and I had to convince myself it was experimental to keep my confidence up for (most) of the rest of the test. I basically ran out of time, guessed on the last 3-4 Q's, and in my 7 PT's I've never run out of time before! My scores thus far have been 171, 173, 175, 170, 175, 169, 175--in that order. I'm hoping against the odds for a 173.

Other sections were fairly typical I thought, the RC had a few tough ones and the LR as well, but nothing that struck me as out of character for this awful test.

[Bruiser]

I had 2 LG sections and don't remember any game about chapters and flowers. I do remember the juicer, trails, apartments, and terms (I think they were in one section). I thought the terms was pretty easy. The trails I realized I missed an inference about 3 questions in, so I had to go back. I think I probably got 2 wrong there.
I agree about the bridges question, there were only 2 LR questions that I re-read more than twice and that was one of the tme. The other was about land and new farming techniques.

[idkmybffjill]

Blanking on the apartments game...what was that about again?

[gatorhoosier]

What was the game everyone is referencing as the "terms" game about again? Just trying to jog the memory and remember which one that was..

Matching classes and terms.

I am having trouble remembering one of the games. There was class/term, that dreadful piece of crap with the juicer and then the last game which was a bunch of cond. rules. What was the other game(I think it was game #2)?

the juicer mixer game had one very obvious inference that kind of made the game a bit easier. I think the games werent necc hard, just a litttle odd. and when I saw oaks and spruces I had a dejavu moment from that one tree game with the parks..I was like whaaaat. then I realized its a different game haha.

I ran out of time on the last game and had to guess 3 questions. poo I hope I got the ones I did right, that would really help me out.

the last rc passage was weird as hell and I guessed on most of the questions. rc is usually my good section. lr1 seemed unusually easy and lr2 seemed medium.

i predict:

best case:
lg: -5
lr1: -0
lr2: -4
rc: -7

worst case:

lg: -8
lr1: -4
lr2: -6
rc: -8

I am retaking a double 161 here...need to not only get higher, but get more than a few points higher. oh goodddd

Y

[rocklos]

I had LG,LR,RC,LR,RC. I hope the second RC wasn't the experimental because if not then I will def. retake in June.

Something about the first RC made it really tough. Toughest then any I have tested with, the second RC seemed to be on par with the RC from June 08 test on.

But I could be completely wrong. Good learning experience, Endurance was the not the problem, nerves was not the problem, I noticed much more questions with principle attached to it.

Different wording for LG's, more "could be true" q's.

If I need to retake, I will be getting a tutor, and work on formal logic, and the brand new games.

anyone know a tutor in the chicago area??

[Gwen]

The first RC was the experimental. The exp section is always one of the first three sections.

hth

[Snuffie]

It went badly.

My first section was LG, which is by far my worst of the three. It was rather difficult and I was certain that it was the experimental. The next up was reading, which I did great on. That was a shame, because despite my great outlay of focus on the reading, I got nailed with another reading in the second half, which means that the first was experimental. This means that I did poorly on the LG, and the reading I thought I did well on didn't count (but the one I'm certain I didn't do as well on does). That's a major disappointment. If I had two LG and only the one reading I think my score might be in the 166 range, but given the turn of fate that hit me I think I'm more likely to get a 160. And man does it hurt. Should I cancel? I'm not interested in anything below top 30, and if I get below a 164-165 I'm certainly going to retake it.

man this is exactly how mine went. for whatever reason... this being my first sitting maybe... I froze in the first section LG and sucked. dominate LR, RC, LR and then BAM.... replaced my awesome RC with another fail. Did poorly cuz I really thought fate was going to give me another LG and then I realized with 30 seconds to spare I had bubbled 28 for 27 questions... never fixed them all. FML. I swore I'd never be a retaker.... now thoughts of cancel for the next few days

Yea this is how my test was too. I was hoping for another LG section so I could improve. It never came, except in my case I thought I did better on the second RC, that first one caused me to zone out quite a bit with the material they were discussing. It was tough to keep my head in the game, the second RC...I dunno I was just sharper after the break and I galvanized myself a bit. I finished it with like 2 min left, which aside from my LG which I ran out of time on, was the most time I used on the test.

+1

I was hoping to get LGs first up - they're my weakest section and I hate being blindsided by them after a grueling AR (read: DEC '09). I still feel that way, but my heart sank as I diagrammed the first game. Then the second. Third wasn't too bad.

Each of the real LGs "felt" like something new. I bet that always happens when timing constraints and testing conditions are factored in. There was only 10 or so people in my administration, and I was the only nonsmoker in the bunch. When the rest filed out to have a fix during the break, I heard them fretting endlessly over that section - yes, I know it's against the rules, and no I didn't participate. All the same, it was nice that I wasn't the only person. That said, the LGs probably weren't anything special. What a difference testing conditions make. Either way, I was utterly vanquished. Not fretting it though. Certainly not going to cancel. It is what it is.

[JCougar]

Are we in agreement that both LR sections had 25 questions?

My test went LR(26)-LG(23)-LR(25)-RC(27)-LR(25)

If the first LR section with 26 questions was the experimental one, that would be fantastic news.

[charlesxavier]

It went badly.

My first section was LG, which is by far my worst of the three. It was rather difficult and I was certain that it was the experimental. The next up was reading, which I did great on. That was a shame, because despite my great outlay of focus on the reading, I got nailed with another reading in the second half, which means that the first was experimental. This means that I did poorly on the LG, and the reading I thought I did well on didn't count (but the one I'm certain I didn't do as well on does). That's a major disappointment. If I had two LG and only the one reading I think my score might be in the 166 range, but given the turn of fate that hit me I think I'm more likely to get a 160. And man does it hurt. Should I cancel? I'm not interested in anything below top 30, and if I get below a 164-165 I'm certainly going to retake it.

man this is exactly how mine went. for whatever reason... this being my first sitting maybe... I froze in the first section LG and sucked. dominate LR, RC, LR and then BAM.... replaced my awesome RC with another fail. Did poorly cuz I really thought fate was going to give me another LG and then I realized with 30 seconds to spare I had bubbled 28 for 27 questions... never fixed them all. FML. I swore I'd never be a retaker.... now thoughts of cancel for the next few days

Yea this is how my test was too. I was hoping for another LG section so I could improve. It never came, except in my case I thought I did better on the second RC, that first one caused me to zone out quite a bit with the material they were discussing. It was tough to keep my head in the game, the second RC...I dunno I was just sharper after the break and I galvanized myself a bit. I finished it with like 2 min left, which aside from my LG which I ran out of time on, was the most time I used on the test.

+1

I was hoping to get LGs first up - they're my weakest section and I hate being blindsided by them after a grueling AR (read: DEC '09). I still feel that way, but my heart sank as I diagrammed the first game. Then the second. Third wasn't too bad.

Each of the real LGs "felt" like something new. I bet that always happens when timing constraints and testing conditions are factored in. There was only 10 or so people in my administration, and I was the only nonsmoker in the bunch. When the rest filed out to have a fix during the break, I heard them fretting endlessly over that section - yes, I know it's against the rules, and no I didn't participate. All the same, it was nice that I wasn't the only person. That said, the LGs probably weren't anything special. What a difference testing conditions make. Either way, I was utterly vanquished. Not fretting it though. Certainly not going to cancel. It is what it is.

I agree. I didn't do too hot on the games. But, I felt that I did well enough on the rest of the test to survive. I did awful one section of games on a PT (missed about 10) and still hit over a 160. So I still have hope.

[egilb]

Yes. I'm pretty sure all three of my LR had 25... but I might not remember correctly.