JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[Daily_Double]

PT 40 tomorrow. I'm gonna kill it.

[Daily_Double]

Has anyone (and I imagine many of you have) done the free June 2007 LSAT available on LSAC? Because I did it cold, more as an introduction to see what the hell the LSAT was about, and I got all the LG questions correct, and not because of lucky guesses -- I actually understood them, for the most part.

So, I'm thinking, "Sweet, I'm okay at LG." And now, when I look at other sample questions, they seem WAY more intense and indecipherable. Is that just me? Was this test particularly easy on LG?

Just curious, as I'm about halfway through LGB and doing pretty well, and wondering if I should be expecting some crazy shit ahead of me...

Haven't done it. You're in for a few curveballs, but it sounds like LG will come easily for you.

[paully]

Hello all, I'm looking forward to studying with you guys and contributing to this thread. I was originally planning on taking the LSAT on Feb. 9th, but after 2 months of hardcore studying, I simply feel unprepared. As a result, I'm withdrawing from the test and taking it in June instead. I've already gone through the Logic Games Bibles (3x each), most of the Kaplan Mastery LG/LR books, and Manhattan guides. My mistake was focusing too much on method rather than practice and timing.

Now that I have four extra months, I'm going to follow PithyPike's method to a tee and finish the dozens of practice tests I have.

So if any of you Feb LSAT lurkers are reading this, don't be afraid to move your test to June. The extra studying will be so worth it.

Good luck to you all!!!!!!! We can do this!!!

[Outsider]

Hello Hello.

Mind if I join you fellas? Saw DD's schedule, looks like I'll be following that till June.

[griffin.811]

Looks like PT40 tonight.

[BlaqBella]

Ok guys, I sent the request to Manhattan and should hear word today on what times are available for us, twice a week. Anyone still requiring the link to the online forum can PM me. Thanks for your patience!

As for PT40, I will have to delay. I'm currently trying to review my mistakes from previous exams and read/study the guides and do some light drilling so I probably would not be able to join you guys this week. I'll try and shoot for next week.

Hope everyone is fully recovered from the Superbowl. I'm quite elated for Baltimore and Ray Lewis (against John Rizzy Rawls approval ). Talk soon guys!

[Daily_Double]

Ok guys, I sent the request to Manhattan and should hear word today on what times are available for us, twice a week. Anyone still requiring the link to the online forum can PM me. Thanks for your patience!

As for PT40, I will have to delay. I'm currently trying to review my mistakes from previous exams and read/study the guides and do some light drilling so I probably would not be able to join you guys this week. I'll try and shoot for next week.

Hope everyone is fully recovered from the Superbowl. I'm quite elated for Baltimore and Ray Lewis (against John Rizzy Rawls approval ). Talk soon guys!

Thanks Bella.

[griffin.811]

Thanks, hopefully we'll get good news with that site. PT23 G3 is tough/time consuming for those looking to test their skills.

[BlaqBella]

Thanks, hopefully we'll get good news with that site. PT23 G3 is tough/time consuming for those looking to test their skills.

The more recent games are getting more and more like this. Time consuming and heavy conditionals. I really need to work on these.

Edit: I find scenarios work best for these type of games.

I created two columns, three rows/three columns in each. I used the definitive condition of Rule 4 and did the following scenarios:

1. J in 1, R in 2 for one slot
2. R in 1, J in 2 for the second slot
3. J and R in 2 for the third slot (we know that this can be true. All we know is they cannot be in Team 1 together).

See if you save any time using this set up.

[wtrc]

Ugh, haven't prepped since Saturday. I suppose checking TLS forums counts.... right....?

[griffin.811]

Thanks, hopefully we'll get good news with that site. PT23 G3 is tough/time consuming for those looking to test their skills.

The more recent games are getting more and more like this. Time consuming and heavy conditionals. I really need to work on these.

Edit: I find scenarios work best for these type of games.

I created two columns, three rows/three columns in each. I used the definitive condition of Rule 4 and did the following scenarios:

1. J in 1, R in 2 for one slot
2. R in 1, J in 2 for the second slot
3. J and R in 2 for the third slot (we know that this can be true. All we know is they cannot be in Team 1 together).

See if you save any time using this set up.

How long did this one take you? It took me 14:38 1st time through. I marked it as one I need to do again. I'll try that next time.

A huge inference was the fact that when we had J in group 1, R was in 2, which meant N could not be in 2, nor could M. This also meant that F must be 2.

[BlaqBella]

Thanks, hopefully we'll get good news with that site. PT23 G3 is tough/time consuming for those looking to test their skills.

The more recent games are getting more and more like this. Time consuming and heavy conditionals. I really need to work on these.

Edit: I find scenarios work best for these type of games.

I created two columns, three rows/three columns in each. I used the definitive condition of Rule 4 and did the following scenarios:

1. J in 1, R in 2 for one slot
2. R in 1, J in 2 for the second slot
3. J and R in 2 for the third slot (we know that this can be true. All we know is they cannot be in Team 1 together).

See if you save any time using this set up.

How long did this one take you? It took me 14:38 1st time through. I marked it as one I need to do again.

~11 minutes without scenarios. With scenarios, ~9 minutes. You'll realize that for some of the "if...then" questions, they can only apply to one of the three setups. Also, as you progress through the questions, saved work can help answer other questions.

[objection_your_honor]

I just printed out PT23, game 3. Took me 7:45, but I did this game twice last month. The first time it took 9:37, and the second time it took 10:30 (weird, huh?).

I noticed this time that Q17 is a 5 second free point (see hypothetical given in Q12). In both of my previous attempts at this it looked like I circled and then eliminated 3 different answers, with endless hypotheticals on the side. Many times just taking a deep breath and taking stock of what you have is enough.

Bella — I don't think you have to set up conditionals (except for J1 -> R2). That just complicates things. I just made chunks and drew lines through them.



Keeping in mind the major restrictive players (S, R, M) as well as which players you still have "in the bank" allows you to move through hypotheticals quickly.

[mindarmed]

checking in to wish everyone good luck on PT 40. do we wanna review wednesday/thursday night?

[wtrc]

checking in to wish everyone good luck on PT 40. do we wanna review wednesday/thursday night?

Thx Armed! I plan on doing it tomorrow morning before work (super early :/), so either works for me. Would doing Thursday and then again two days later (or are we doing Sunday now?) be too much for people?

[Daily_Double]

checking in to wish everyone good luck on PT 40. do we wanna review wednesday/thursday night?

Thx Armed! I plan on doing it tomorrow morning before work (super early :/), so either works for me. Would doing Thursday and then again two days later (or are we doing Sunday now?) be too much for people?

I can do group review Thursday night.

[rebexness]

[A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A]

Is everyone doing the DD schedule?

ETA: Have LRB and MLR. Which one first?

[ready4180]

checking in to wish everyone good luck on PT 40. do we wanna review wednesday/thursday night?

Thx Armed! I plan on doing it tomorrow morning before work (super early :/), so either works for me. Would doing Thursday and then again two days later (or are we doing Sunday now?) be too much for people?

I can do group review Thursday night.

Thursday night would work for me as well!

[griffin.811]

Thanks, hopefully we'll get good news with that site. PT23 G3 is tough/time consuming for those looking to test their skills.

The more recent games are getting more and more like this. Time consuming and heavy conditionals. I really need to work on these.

Edit: I find scenarios work best for these type of games.

I created two columns, three rows/three columns in each. I used the definitive condition of Rule 4 and did the following scenarios:

1. J in 1, R in 2 for one slot
2. R in 1, J in 2 for the second slot
3. J and R in 2 for the third slot (we know that this can be true. All we know is they cannot be in Team 1 together).

See if you save any time using this set up.

How long did this one take you? It took me 14:38 1st time through. I marked it as one I need to do again.

~11 minutes without scenarios. With scenarios, ~9 minutes. You'll realize that for some of the "if...then" questions, they can only apply to one of the three setups. Also, as you progress through the questions, saved work can help answer other questions.

Nice, I'll def be using this next time.

[rebexness]

[griffin.811]

@objection, thats impressive!

Wed seems best since its sooner, but either works.

[griffin.811]

Is everyone doing the DD schedule?

ETA: Have LRB and MLR. Which one first?

For the most part. People are tailoring a bit to fit their schedules.

[A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A]

Is everyone doing the DD schedule?

ETA: Have LRB and MLR. Which one first?

I did LRB then MLR. I did not feel very confident after finishing the LRB. I would do MLR first- then if you need more review I'd do the LRB.

I have the same question- LGB or MLG first? I have heard they differ significantly in approach, which the other "pairs" don't seem to.

Thanks. I think LGB is good for the linear games, but I didn't like their negated iff (A<---|--->B) for grouping, and I like this method instead of the LGB for sequencing, which is similar to MLG.

[BlaqBella]

Is everyone doing the DD schedule?

ETA: Have LRB and MLR. Which one first?

I did LRB then MLR. I did not feel very confident after finishing the LRB. I would do MLR first- then if you need more review I'd do the LRB.

I have the same question- LGB or MLG first? I have heard they differ significantly in approach, which the other "pairs" don't seem to.

MLG all the way. Only thing I don't like is their conditional chain approach. Other than that, everything else works for me on their approach.

Also voting for MLR (Argument Core is the bomb) but for more detail-oriented information (ie types of flaws), LRB. I'm doing a hybrid of both.