real The Official December 2016 Waiters Group - Patience is a Virtue Forum

[cherrygalore]

My cheap ass will just print out the sections on LSAC if I want to take it again

I was going to do that but, whatever I already have every single test in existence might as well cap it off.

Any else watching UFC 205?

Me too. I'm trying to take as many as I can but I generally only find the RC and LR in 1-20 to be somewhat similar to recent tests.

Will watch UFC 205 on YouTube later. McGregor and Diaz was kind of weak. Hopefully this is a good one.

I like Jedrzejczyk and wonderboy a lot, I despise McG's Mayweather-esq attitude without the record to back it up. I think if Eddie can avoid his left and use his wrestling he'll pull off a UD.

Hype for my PTs tomorrow because of the fights tho.

Man I'm rather new to the sport. Just started watching because of JRE. McG is ultimately entertaining. You gotta have a guy like that around to spice it up. Diaz should've won that though. Too much cbd lol

Mcgregor definitely brings in a lot of new people just like ronda did. Diaz v. Mcgregor 2 was a draw in my book, maybe slight mcgregor but, he could have done so much more against a top 5 lightweight (he barely fought at welter). if you're new, check out a lot of old fights like hendo/shogun, aldo/Mendes ii, dillashaw/barao 1

also JRE is dope, Sam harris is my favorite guest on there.

McGregor brought me into it. Makes it entertaining.

[34iplaw]

Is "never" the same as "always" in terms of conditional rules? I was operating with the understanding that "never" causes the second element of the sentence to become sufficient and and the first element to become necessary, it seems to be the case with "always" as well.

Edit: Well maybe not with "always," but never still seems to check out.

Can someone confirm?

Try to understand the reasoning behind it rather than rote memorization. I think it helps a lot. I'm not sure if I'm totally following what your saying, but it seems like it may be flipped. Hopefully, the below helps.

Never is the temporal version of none / no.
Always is the temporal version of all.

Never=none=no

When it rains, the sun never shines.
R->!S
S->!R

Thank you. This is quite helpful. I didn't realize they were simple quantity modifiers I guess you could call them.

I think I was getting confused with sentences where the sufficient modifiers were closeby, like "The sun never shines when it rains."'

Haha glad to hear. Yeah...I believe they are considered quantity modifiers. All basically behaves as an if. If every apple is red it would also make sense to say all apples are red.

The sentence you have above would be a not both relationship. R->!S

Older LSAT I assume? I'm having a hard time thinking of a question where a correct answer could be decided between the two.

Think it's somewhere in the single digit zone.

[+] Spoiler

The stimulus is about how a society cannot be coined "lawless" if it has crimes and that people should really call it "lawful."
Inference question. The two closest choices are either that a society with crimes has some laws or many laws;
TCR is the former since a society with crime HAS to have at least one law, but not necessarily "many."

Other than this question, however, I don't think there are many *ahem* any others regarding this relationship.

So which is it lads? Is many the equivalent of some (at least one, possibly up to 100%)? From the question mentioned, it sounds like it almost has a higher degree than some if that was the answer.

I think many does somewhat imply having a higher lower boundary than some, but I've never seen a question distinguish between the two and the only one Deardevil recalls is from PT1-10. I wouldn't worry much about it.

[Mikey]

omg I bested my top score with PT45! I was feeling semi-distracted through RC, specifically the fungi passage, but it was my best RC yet.

LR1: -4
RC: -1
AR: -1
LR2: -2

Total 91/174


IT'S LIT!

ayyy, good shit bro

Congrats! What is this AR you speak of?

You mean analytical reasoning? It's the fancy way to say logic games lol

[Barack O'Drama]

omg I bested my top score with PT45! I was feeling semi-distracted through RC, specifically the fungi passage, but it was my best RC yet.

LR1: -4
RC: -1
AR: -1
LR2: -2

Total 91/174


IT'S LIT!

ayyy, good shit bro

Congrats! What is this AR you speak of?

Analytical reasoning aka Logic Games. I think AR sounds more badass! lol

[Mikey]

Forgot to update about my drilling

Finished those 56 method of reasoning questions yesterday. As usual, didn't time myself but moved at a decent speed through the chapter. Went -4.

1 wrong on a mediumish one
3 wrong on the more difficult ones

Feeling lazy today but might get something in sometime in the day

[34iplaw]

Forgot to update about my drilling

Finished those 56 method of reasoning questions yesterday. As usual, didn't time myself but moved at a decent speed through the chapter. Went -4.

1 wrong on a mediumish one
3 wrong on the more difficult ones

Feeling lazy today but might get something in sometime in the day

Congrats. Was being facetious about the AR bit above .

That said, I think methods of reasoning is one of the areas where you can really benefit from thinking about what makes wrong answers wrong. It's worth it to do more casually in downtime. Same goes for flawed.

[Barack O'Drama]

Forgot to update about my drilling

Finished those 56 method of reasoning questions yesterday. As usual, didn't time myself but moved at a decent speed through the chapter. Went -4.

1 wrong on a mediumish one
3 wrong on the more difficult ones

Feeling lazy today but might get something in sometime in the day

Congrats. Was being facetious about the AR bit above .

That said, I think methods of reasoning is one of the areas where you can really benefit from thinking about what makes wrong answers wrong. It's worth it to do more casually in downtime. Same goes for flawed.

Haha, I was thinking you must know that. Now I feel foolish

[Mikey]

Forgot to update about my drilling

Finished those 56 method of reasoning questions yesterday. As usual, didn't time myself but moved at a decent speed through the chapter. Went -4.

1 wrong on a mediumish one
3 wrong on the more difficult ones

Feeling lazy today but might get something in sometime in the day

Congrats. Was being facetious about the AR bit above .

That said, I think methods of reasoning is one of the areas where you can really benefit from thinking about what makes wrong answers wrong. It's worth it to do more casually in downtime. Same goes for flawed.

Yeah for sure. Being lazy today and I just did 25 flaw questions. Went -0 but they're all part of the easiest questions set so not that much of an accomplishment lmao.

How's shit going for you Bruh?

[34iplaw]

Forgot to update about my drilling

Finished those 56 method of reasoning questions yesterday. As usual, didn't time myself but moved at a decent speed through the chapter. Went -4.

1 wrong on a mediumish one
3 wrong on the more difficult ones

Feeling lazy today but might get something in sometime in the day

Congrats. Was being facetious about the AR bit above .

That said, I think methods of reasoning is one of the areas where you can really benefit from thinking about what makes wrong answers wrong. It's worth it to do more casually in downtime. Same goes for flawed.

Yeah for sure. Being lazy today and I just did 25 flaw questions. Went -0 but they're all part of the easiest questions set so not that much of an accomplishment lmao.

How's shit going for you Bruh?

I feel like RC is getting better but I need to do sections again. I've been taking 3-4 mins to read passages but rarely have to refer back to the text.

This weekend I felt like absolute garbage. Like it took me 10 minutes to do a relative ordering game...granted it had more questions but it's a game I previously did in ~5 minutes. Just found myself rereading a lot.

Trying to figure out webhosts. I think I finally found one that works, so I can get rid of /refunded for the roughly $1K I have in web hosts on my card before I get the bill. It's a lot cheaper to buy it for 2-3 years at a time.

[34iplaw]

Forgot to update about my drilling

Finished those 56 method of reasoning questions yesterday. As usual, didn't time myself but moved at a decent speed through the chapter. Went -4.

1 wrong on a mediumish one
3 wrong on the more difficult ones

Feeling lazy today but might get something in sometime in the day

Congrats. Was being facetious about the AR bit above .

That said, I think methods of reasoning is one of the areas where you can really benefit from thinking about what makes wrong answers wrong. It's worth it to do more casually in downtime. Same goes for flawed.

Haha, I was thinking you must know that. Now I feel foolish

[VMars]

Went -0 for the first time on a timed LG section (PT 74). All the games felt pretty straight forward but I am still pretty stoked!

[Barack O'Drama]

Went -0 for the first time on a timed LG section (PT 74). All the games felt pretty straight forward but I am still pretty stoked!

congrats ! Such an awesome feeling

[Mikey]

Went -0 for the first time on a timed LG section (PT 74). All the games felt pretty straight forward but I am still pretty stoked!

Nice!!

[JessiCAL]

Hi,

Need some advice/help from sage TLSers!
I recently hit an all time high score (which I'm very excited about!), but I seem to be inconsistent in my scores for LR and RC sections. In LR, I've gone anywhere from -1 to -6/section, and in RC, I've gone anywhere from -3 to -9 (major ouch!). Of course, this has caused my scores to fluctuate wildly from 166 to low 170s. I'd love to get more consistent (read: more consistently right) on these sections.

Has anyone else had problems with consistency? If so, how did you resolve it? What was the specific problem that led to inconsistent scores? I ask because if someone is capable of scoring -1 on an LR section, it's not a matter of ability/understanding, right?

Thanks in advance for any input/wisdom!

[34iplaw]

Hi,

Need some advice/help from sage TLSers!
I recently hit an all time high score (which I'm very excited about!), but I seem to be inconsistent in my scores for LR and RC sections. In LR, I've gone anywhere from -1 to -6/section, and in RC, I've gone anywhere from -3 to -9 (major ouch!). Of course, this has caused my scores to fluctuate wildly from 166 to low 170s. I'd love to get more consistent (read: more consistently right) on these sections.

Has anyone else had problems with consistency? If so, how did you resolve it? What was the specific problem that led to inconsistent scores? I ask because if someone is capable of scoring -1 on an LR section, it's not a matter of ability/understanding, right?

Thanks in advance for any input/wisdom!

Are you finishing sections on time consistently? I'm talking about reading every question rather than skimming and having to guess on the last few if that makes sense. If not, you may want to make sure you aren't wasting 3-4 minutes on a particularly hard question.

Also, you need to be honest with yourself if those -1/-2s are luck... yaknow? Like, are those tests where you just get a lucky guess or two more? I don't mean to be dismissive - just trying to properly ascertain things to help a truthful evaluation!

[JessiCAL]

Hi,

Need some advice/help from sage TLSers!
I recently hit an all time high score (which I'm very excited about!), but I seem to be inconsistent in my scores for LR and RC sections. In LR, I've gone anywhere from -1 to -6/section, and in RC, I've gone anywhere from -3 to -9 (major ouch!). Of course, this has caused my scores to fluctuate wildly from 166 to low 170s. I'd love to get more consistent (read: more consistently right) on these sections.

Has anyone else had problems with consistency? If so, how did you resolve it? What was the specific problem that led to inconsistent scores? I ask because if someone is capable of scoring -1 on an LR section, it's not a matter of ability/understanding, right?

Thanks in advance for any input/wisdom!

Are you finishing sections on time consistently? I'm talking about reading every question rather than skimming and having to guess on the last few if that makes sense. If not, you may want to make sure you aren't wasting 3-4 minutes on a particularly hard question.

Also, you need to be honest with yourself if those -1/-2s are luck... yaknow? Like, are those tests where you just get a lucky guess or two more? I don't mean to be dismissive - just trying to properly ascertain things to help a truthful evaluation!

Hi 34iplaw,

I'm not finishing sections on time consistently. Sometimes my timing is great, and other times, I find that I'm rushing to finish the last 8 problems in 10 minutes. I've also been trying to mark the time when I'm done with 1-2 pages as I take a section so that I can try to spot where I'm wasting time. (At Q10, I'm ~11-13 mins in, and at Q18, I'm ~23-25 mins in.) I find that I'm often losing points around Qs 13-20.

I don't think the -1/-2s have been pure luck... After the test, I BR the entire LR section, not just the ones I was unsure of/got incorrect. At least for LR, I find that I'm rarely actually guessing. I almost always get the answer choices down to 1 or 2, but that I always feel better about 1 answer choice over another (ie: not just a blind guess). One odd thing is... I always do better in LR 2 than in LR 1... always. On RC, timing is definitely more an issue, and I find that I feel less certain of my answers in that section (so more guessing). There is also a significant difference between my actual and BR score. For example, on my recent all-time high score, actual = 171; BR=178!

Didn't think you were being dismissive - and appreciate the intent! I recognize that the sooner I can spot the problem(s), the sooner I can be consistently hitting those 17x's in time for test day!!

Sorry for the barrage of "analytics" (if you can even call it that...), and thanks!

[Greenteachurro]

Nice little comeback from my previous PT.

PT 73

174:

RC:-3
LG:-1
LR1:-1
LR2:-3

Its pretty cool that I've gotten a few pt's that are higher than my highest PT from my studying for the September test (173).

Also LR 2 felt super hard for some reason, LR2 Q 13 is like IMPOSSIBLE. I have no idea how this one makes sense. Probably one of the most obscure LR's I've ever seen maybe this one just doesn't click or something. I've never gone back over a question and in the second time through not understood why I got it wrong.

[Instrumental]

Nice little comeback from my previous PT.

PT 73

174:

RC:-3
LG:-1
LR1:-1
LR2:-3

Its pretty cool that I've gotten a few pt's that are higher than my highest PT from my studying for the September test (173).

Also LR 2 felt super hard for some reason, LR2 Q 13 is like IMPOSSIBLE. I have no idea how this one makes sense. Probably one of the most obscure LR's I've ever seen maybe this one just doesn't click or something. I've never gone back over a question and in the second time through not understood why I got it wrong.

Dope score
Actually managed to get that specific question right when I took it. I'll try to explain:

[+] Spoiler

Methane breaks down when exposed to sunlight's uv rays.
The speaker's conclusion is that because of that, any methane in the martian atmosphere must have been released recently.
Since the conclusion is based off the premise that methane breaks down when exposed to sunlight, it must be assuming that all methane in the martian atmosphere is eventually exposed to sunlight, because if it weren't, one would not be able to make any indication of how long it had been in the atmosphere.

[34iplaw]

Hi,

Need some advice/help from sage TLSers!
I recently hit an all time high score (which I'm very excited about!), but I seem to be inconsistent in my scores for LR and RC sections. In LR, I've gone anywhere from -1 to -6/section, and in RC, I've gone anywhere from -3 to -9 (major ouch!). Of course, this has caused my scores to fluctuate wildly from 166 to low 170s. I'd love to get more consistent (read: more consistently right) on these sections.

Has anyone else had problems with consistency? If so, how did you resolve it? What was the specific problem that led to inconsistent scores? I ask because if someone is capable of scoring -1 on an LR section, it's not a matter of ability/understanding, right?

Thanks in advance for any input/wisdom!

Are you finishing sections on time consistently? I'm talking about reading every question rather than skimming and having to guess on the last few if that makes sense. If not, you may want to make sure you aren't wasting 3-4 minutes on a particularly hard question.

Also, you need to be honest with yourself if those -1/-2s are luck... yaknow? Like, are those tests where you just get a lucky guess or two more? I don't mean to be dismissive - just trying to properly ascertain things to help a truthful evaluation!

Hi 34iplaw,

I'm not finishing sections on time consistently. Sometimes my timing is great, and other times, I find that I'm rushing to finish the last 8 problems in 10 minutes. I've also been trying to mark the time when I'm done with 1-2 pages as I take a section so that I can try to spot where I'm wasting time. (At Q10, I'm ~11-13 mins in, and at Q18, I'm ~23-25 mins in.) I find that I'm often losing points around Qs 13-20.

I don't think the -1/-2s have been pure luck... After the test, I BR the entire LR section, not just the ones I was unsure of/got incorrect. At least for LR, I find that I'm rarely actually guessing. I almost always get the answer choices down to 1 or 2, but that I always feel better about 1 answer choice over another (ie: not just a blind guess). One odd thing is... I always do better in LR 2 than in LR 1... always. On RC, timing is definitely more an issue, and I find that I feel less certain of my answers in that section (so more guessing). There is also a significant difference between my actual and BR score. For example, on my recent all-time high score, actual = 171; BR=178!

Didn't think you were being dismissive - and appreciate the intent! I recognize that the sooner I can spot the problem(s), the sooner I can be consistently hitting those 17x's in time for test day!!

Sorry for the barrage of "analytics" (if you can even call it that...), and thanks!

Glad to hear - well, I think that you've probably pointed out the issue. Do the scores correlate to when you feel rushed? I find that the middle 10 can have some answers that are nasty for those trying to fly too quickly, but it's still a bit odd to be missing most of the points there. At a BR of 178, you know the material. It's the time and the pressure that's killing you. I think on your next PT, try to make a conscience effort to read through a question two times - three at absolute most. If you don't know the answer, go with your gut and come back if you have time. Keep in mind that you can still miss a few questions and get a mid to high 170s... don't place so much emphasis on one question. Basically, I look at it this way. On any section of the LSAT... if you aren't finishing sections with time to spare and you spend extra time (3 minutes) on a question that prevents you from giving two or three other questions a fair look, you've already lost the battle on that question regardless of whether you got it right. Don't get me wrong... it's good to get it right...but the numbers are working against you. After all, you know the material, and you've definitely had the experience of answering some of those late 20-26s in a few seconds flat. Some questions just click regardless of where they appear on the test.

PS - Call Caesar and Tim Gunn - it's happening.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-new ... 88/?no-ist

They've...found...fashion.

Dawn of the Walkway on Planet of the Apes

[harveybirdman502]

Is "never" the same as "always" in terms of conditional rules? I was operating with the understanding that "never" causes the second element of the sentence to become sufficient and and the first element to become necessary, it seems to be the case with "always" as well.

Edit: Well maybe not with "always," but never still seems to check out.

Can someone confirm?

Try to understand the reasoning behind it rather than rote memorization. I think it helps a lot. I'm not sure if I'm totally following what your saying, but it seems like it may be flipped. Hopefully, the below helps.

Never is the temporal version of none / no.
Always is the temporal version of all.

Never=none=no

When it rains, the sun never shines.
R->!S
S->!R

Thank you. This is quite helpful. I didn't realize they were simple quantity modifiers I guess you could call them.

I think I was getting confused with sentences where the sufficient modifiers were closeby, like "The sun never shines when it rains."'

Haha glad to hear. Yeah...I believe they are considered quantity modifiers. All basically behaves as an if. If every apple is red it would also make sense to say all apples are red.

The sentence you have above would be a not both relationship. R->!S

Older LSAT I assume? I'm having a hard time thinking of a question where a correct answer could be decided between the two.

Think it's somewhere in the single digit zone.

[+] Spoiler

The stimulus is about how a society cannot be coined "lawless" if it has crimes and that people should really call it "lawful."
Inference question. The two closest choices are either that a society with crimes has some laws or many laws;
TCR is the former since a society with crime HAS to have at least one law, but not necessarily "many."

Other than this question, however, I don't think there are many *ahem* any others regarding this relationship.

So which is it lads? Is many the equivalent of some (at least one, possibly up to 100%)? From the question mentioned, it sounds like it almost has a higher degree than some if that was the answer.

I think many does somewhat imply having a higher lower boundary than some, but I've never seen a question distinguish between the two and the only one Deardevil recalls is from PT1-10. I wouldn't worry much about it.

Ahh ok. Thank you again. Very helpful. I looked it up in the Powerscore book today just to see if never or always was mentioned, and sure enough, they were in there right next to quantity modifiers under "probability" modifiers. Silly mistake but good to know.

As far as many, that's great to have that cleared up. I've noticed the first 20 tests or so are a bit different so that makes sense. Big thanks ip and deardevil. You guys have been great.

Sorry for the wall of text everyone.

[dj9i27]

Just got done relaxing from my probably final hell day, started at 830am with timed LR and just some LG (untimed because lazy), followed by PT74 which I got a 173, break which entailed seeing the sun for the first time that day. Went back in and drilled more RC, then took PT78 which was a 177. I think I just suck in the mornings which is great, I found the games in 74 much harder (especially 3, 3 can go away) than 78. ended about an hour ago, need sleep.

Overall I'm feeling more confident that September, I wish I could have taken the test that day but, I won't complain about 2.5 more weeks of studying. Hope everyone else is doing well, there is still plenty of time imo.

[nimbus cloud]

.

[dj9i27]

.

[Mikey]

Going to continue doing flaw questions today. did 25 yesterday (25/25, the easier ones at the beginning of the cambridge chapter). going to do maybe 50 more today, def. not finishing it all today since there's like 150 something flaw questions in that book.

after the next 50, i'm going to save the remaining flaw questions for drilling during other Q types. since flaw questions are pretty common, there's no harm in finishing it quick and not having fresh questions to drill, esp the harder ones.

[Greenteachurro]

Nice little comeback from my previous PT.

PT 73

174:

RC:-3
LG:-1
LR1:-1
LR2:-3

Its pretty cool that I've gotten a few pt's that are higher than my highest PT from my studying for the September test (173).

Also LR 2 felt super hard for some reason, LR2 Q 13 is like IMPOSSIBLE. I have no idea how this one makes sense. Probably one of the most obscure LR's I've ever seen maybe this one just doesn't click or something. I've never gone back over a question and in the second time through not understood why I got it wrong.

Dope score
Actually managed to get that specific question right when I took it. I'll try to explain:

[+] Spoiler

Methane breaks down when exposed to sunlight's uv rays.
The speaker's conclusion is that because of that, any methane in the martian atmosphere must have been released recently.
Since the conclusion is based off the premise that methane breaks down when exposed to sunlight, it must be assuming that all methane in the martian atmosphere is eventually exposed to sunlight, because if it weren't, one would not be able to make any indication of how long it had been in the atmosphere.

Oh that's obscure, but the explanation makes sense! For some reason I just have like a hard time wrapping my head around that one