September 2014 Retakers Forum

MegamanX2 · Post by **MegamanX2** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:50 pm

Dropping by to wish you all good luck!

I've received a lot of great advice trolling these forums and thought I should finally contribute something.

I recently improved 6 points on a retake to get to 171, and I HIGHLY recommend using The LSAT Trainer. (http://www.thelsattrainer.com/)

I used mostly PowerScore bibles and PTs the first time around, and I felt like the Trainer was great at pushing me past the ceilings I had hit with those materials. I also found his method for RC was the only one I have seen that noticeably improved my scores.

I ended the test with 4/6 misses on my final LR section when I usually go -0 to -2 on LR, which I attribute to fatigue, so I am confident a younger person who sleeps a little better the night before the test can reach the mid to high 170s using the Trainer and reviewing carefully. For LG review 7sage is amazing.

PM if you have any questions and good luck!

DoveBodyWash · Post by **DoveBodyWash** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 2:03 pm

90convoy wrote:
Learn_Live_Hope wrote:
90convoy wrote:
Learn_Live_Hope wrote:Checking in…disappointing 173
cmon...
Need at least 175. I'm a splitter

Ill be hanging in here…you should join us.

Ahhhh... Icic. But ehhh I don't want to but I know I need to. I'm a high 160s low 170s average Pt'er and have gotten shammed out of my average on every test The lsat has literally consumed 10months of my life I don't want it so consumer another 2

lol a 175 won't make a difference. i say this as a splitter who had a 175. It's all about how ur score falls in relation to target school's median. A 173 will will yield same results as 175

evolution · Post by **evolution** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 2:03 pm

I'm thinking about getting the LSAT Trainer, so I went on Mike's website and clicked on the amazon link. But in another thread, he said he released the 1.4 version back in June, but amazon still has it as version 1?

Since Mike's away atm, does anyone know if the Trainer on Amazon is the newest version?

appind · Post by **appind** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 2:11 pm

MegamanX2 wrote: I felt like the Trainer was great at pushing me past the ceilings I had hit with those materials. I also found his method for RC was the only one I have seen that noticeably improved my scores.

congrats!

can you cite an example of technique that only trainer had? I truly want to know, considering I screwed RC. I did trainer, it was OK but nothing earth shattering. Or, may be I didn't study it the right way.

I feel that people who are doing very well on lsat are doing well because of the work they put in, not just prepping for the lsat exam but other things too such as majors that lend to lsat type reasoning, and good reading habits, academic atmosphere when growing up etc. Those who do well also take many prep courses, do books, and end up giving these incidental factors more credit than what's fair.

MegamanX2 · Post by **MegamanX2** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 2:22 pm

MegamanX2 wrote:
I felt like the Trainer was great at pushing me past the ceilings I had hit with those materials. I also found his method for RC was the only one I have seen that noticeably improved my scores.

Can you cite an example of technique that only trainer had? I truly want to know, considering I screwed RC. I did trainer, it was OK but nothing earth shattering. Or, may be I didn't study it the right way.

I feel that people who are doing very well on lsat are doing well because of the work you put in, not just prepping for the lsat exam but other things too such as majors that lend to lsat type reasoning, and good reading habits, academic atmosphere when growing up etc. Those who do well also take many prep courses, do books, and end up giving these incidental factors more credit than what's fair.

Hmm it wasn't so much a particular technique as it was the way he gets you to think about each section and how to review that helped me. For example, on LR, instead of jumping directly into question types, he has you drill finding flaws over and over and over. Coming from PowerScore, having you read the question stem first was extremely helpful for me (although I think that's standard across other prep materials). For RC, reading for structure helped me focus on the right things, though I still struggle with that section and think there is probably something better out there.

Learning to spend significant time reviewing and redoing missed problems, and learning the material BEFORE PTing I think also just makes sense, but not something that other materials have you do. On the retake, aside from a diagnostic, I didn't do a single PT until the last 2+ weeks, when I did 6 + review.

On your second point, I of course innate ability / a good college education helps, but I think the test is very trainable and is not even close to a straight IQ test. That's another reason I liked the trainer, he gets you to trust that your efforts will pay off, which I think they will. I'm sure not everyone can get a 180, but I do think that most intelligent people can get the score I did with enough effort. It took me several years, one cancel and one retake before I got there, but I did and that's what matters in the end.

I think one of the mistakes some people make (and I definitely made) was looking for a silver bullet study material. Nothing in the Trainer is earth-shattering, and no matter what methods you use you have to put tons of hours and sweat into this test. Except for a few geniuses, that's just how it is.

Running out now but I'll check later if people have questions. Good luck everyone!

MegamanX2 · Post by **MegamanX2** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 2:27 pm

I'll just add a couple things:

The study schedules in the Trainer were very helpful for pushing me to study as much as I could and in the most effective way possible.

I think I benefitted a lot from using lots of different materials, in addition to PowerScore & the Trainer I used 7sage to review LG, Manhattan's website to review LR problems, and TLS to get advice on reviewing (Noodley's guide was great). Retaking gives you the advantage of having a base to start from, and I felt like the Trainer got me to believe in myself again after the first letdown (which everyone here has had if you're retaking), hunker down and just study like mad.

Hope that helps!

alansadler · Post by **alansadler** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 3:31 pm

Checking in, just registered for the test. Got a 169 on the June test (which sucks cause I only got -1 on the supposedly hard LG), which I'd probably be happy with if it wasn't well below my PT average. Hoping to feel less pressure this time around, as even if I screw up again I should be looking at some solid T14 offers with my GPA.

Any advice for someone who has exhausted all their PTs on getting an accurate picture of where I'm at through this re study process?

birdlaw624 · Post by **birdlaw624** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 3:44 pm

on the 2nd page of this thread Dave Hall (3 180's on the LSAT) gives his thoughts on reusing old tests

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 7&start=25

Dipper · Post by **Dipper** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 3:59 pm

birdlaw624 wrote:on the 2nd page of this thread Dave Hall (3 180's on the LSAT) gives his thoughts on reusing old tests

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 7&start=25

Also this one:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=150072

mornincounselor · Post by **mornincounselor** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 4:10 pm

Post removed.

Dipper · Post by **Dipper** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 4:28 pm

mornincounselor wrote:
Dipper wrote:
appind wrote:Guys,
Was RC and LR1 really difficult? Can you guys please post by how much you did worse on RC and LR1 than your average scores in these sections.

Knew that did poor on RC but felt OK with LR1.

RC: -9
LR1: -7
LR2: -2
I ate it on LR 1. I don't know why. I haven't gotten up the gumption to look at the questions yet, but here's what I got:
RC: -3
LR1: -9
LR2: -3

I seriously need to strengthen my flaw game. I feel like there were so many flaw questions on this test, and I think I have a hard problem identifying the GREATEST flaw in the argument, versus any flaw.

Does anyone want to chat (maybe this weekend?) to go over the questions in LR1?
Since when has the LSAT ever asked a "greatest flaw" question? If there's multiple flaws it makes it a bit harder because it may seem like multiple flaws are present in the choices but there will only ever be one correctly represented in the choices.

"Most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that..."

jmjm · Post by **jmjm** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 4:43 pm

Dipper wrote:
mornincounselor wrote:
Dipper wrote:
I ate it on LR 1. I don't know why. I haven't gotten up the gumption to look at the questions yet, but here's what I got:
RC: -3
LR1: -9
LR2: -3

I seriously need to strengthen my flaw game. I feel like there were so many flaw questions on this test, and I think I have a hard problem identifying the GREATEST flaw in the argument, versus any flaw.

Does anyone want to chat (maybe this weekend?) to go over the questions in LR1?
Since when has the LSAT ever asked a "greatest flaw" question? If there's multiple flaws it makes it a bit harder because it may seem like multiple flaws are present in the choices but there will only ever be one correctly represented in the choices.
"Most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that..."

instructions do say that but that's only because it provides extra cushion to lsac in case someone contests. In practice, there are no questions with 2 answers that satisfy what the stem asks even if you take out "most." This applies to all kinds of questions - strengthen, weaken, flaw etc. So for a str question, one choice and only one choice will str even to the least extent possible. All other choices will weaken or be neutral.

mornincounselor · Post by **mornincounselor** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 4:54 pm

Post removed.

dasani13 · Post by **dasani13** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 5:00 pm

Checking in! Strategizing tonight, studying starts tomorrow.

jmjm · Post by **jmjm** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 5:05 pm

mornincounselor wrote:
instructions do say that but that's only because it provides extra cushion to lsac in case someone contests. In practice, there are no questions with 2 answers that satisfy what the stem asks even if you take out "most." This applies to all kinds of questions - strengthen, weaken, flaw etc. So for a str question, one choice and only one choice will str even to the least extent possible. All other choices will weaken or be neutral.
Only one will ever strengthen the relationship between support and conclusion. An ( -n tricky) incorrect choice may strengthen the conclusion through other means.

cite?
If the Q asks for str the reasoning, then yes, even though I don't think there is any such Q (1 choice str reasoning, 1 choice str concl) in published lsats. If the Q asks for strengthening the conclusion then you will have only 1 choice that strengthens in the slightest.

pcph · Post by **pcph** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 5:53 pm

mornincounselor · Post by **mornincounselor** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:25 pm

Post removed.

dasani13 · Post by **dasani13** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:29 pm

birdlaw624 wrote:checking in. Got a 165 on June up from 157 in Oct 13 which is nice but I was PTing much higher. went -15 on LR which absolutely killed me. going to take the rest of the week and this weekend off and then get back to studying. is it worth drilling LR with questions that I've already seen?

Yes it is. What material are you using to drill?

jmjm · Post by **jmjm** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:40 pm

mornincounselor wrote:
jmjm wrote:
mornincounselor wrote:
instructions do say that but that's only because it provides extra cushion to lsac in case someone contests. In practice, there are no questions with 2 answers that satisfy what the stem asks even if you take out "most." This applies to all kinds of questions - strengthen, weaken, flaw etc. So for a str question, one choice and only one choice will str even to the least extent possible. All other choices will weaken or be neutral.
Only one will ever strengthen the relationship between support and conclusion. An ( -n tricky) incorrect choice may strengthen the conclusion through other means.
cite?
If the Q asks for str the reasoning, then yes, even though I don't think there is any such Q (1 choice str reasoning, 1 choice str concl) in published lsats. If the Q asks for strengthening the conclusion then you will have only 1 choice that strengthens in the slightest.

Well if, for example, the conclusion of the argument is "Jamie likes sports", and the support is "All girls like sports" an incorrect choice could strengthen the likelihood of Jamie liking sports while the correct answer would strengthen the assumption that Jamie was a girl.

[I can't think of a real example off the top of my head but I'm sure I remember drilling some in the strengthen packet]

Anyways, here the cite.

LSAT Trainer Page 275

"Some of the most tempting wrong answers for Strengthen and Weaken questions are ones that strenghten or weaken the author's point, but not in a way that impacts how he made the point originally (i.e. the reasoning)"
…

"Rather, we want to focus on how that answer choice, if true, impacts the relationship between the support given and the conclusion reached."

I was referring to the actual LSAT Q cite. I don't think you'd find this issue in a real lsat Q that asks for str the conclusion as opposed to the argument.

With respect to the lsat trainer quote, I think it's not saying anything different. BP shinners and MK have debated this in a post.

scandk · Post by **scandk** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:50 pm

169 on June14, so close. feelsbadman. It's like the girl agreed to the date but I can't afford dinner.

I'm gonna take the rest of the week to recover, then set up a study schedule and go on from there.

Best of luck to all of us retakers; we won't get beat again.

mornincounselor · Post by **mornincounselor** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:04 pm

Post removed.

jmjm · Post by **jmjm** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:19 pm

I was referring to the actual LSAT Q cite. I don't think you'd find this issue in a real lsat Q that asks for str the conclusion as opposed to the argument.

With respect to the lsat trainer quote, I think it's not saying anything different. BP shinners and MK have debated this in a post.
Interesting. You wouldn't happen to have a link to that discussion, would you?

There will be no actual LSAT str Q where this is an issue.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... conclusion

Learn_Live_Hope · Post by **Learn_Live_Hope** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:26 pm

Dipper-I miss you.

Where are you?

birdlaw624 · Post by **birdlaw624** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 11:53 am

dasani13 wrote:
birdlaw624 wrote:checking in. Got a 165 on June up from 157 in Oct 13 which is nice but I was PTing much higher. went -15 on LR which absolutely killed me. going to take the rest of the week and this weekend off and then get back to studying. is it worth drilling LR with questions that I've already seen?
Yes it is. What material are you using to drill?

I have the cambridge LR by type of 1-38 preptests and I have almost every preptest from 39-62. I'm not sure how I should go about drilling this time around but I'm losing the most points on LR so that's definitely my priority once I start back up next week.

kirilrez · Post by **kirilrez** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 2:10 pm

Checking in. Started studying a couple of months ago.
Took the test in October 2013.