The Official December 2015 Study Group Forum

PoopNpants · Post by **PoopNpants** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 6:37 pm

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:Im throwing PT 31 game 4 out there as a recomendation. Pretty tough game and pretty unusual. Might be a good test for game fundamentals.

I know most people think Game 2 is the hardest game in that section but I had so much trouble setting up Game 4 I had no idea how to represent any of the rules.

ltowns1 · Post by **ltowns1** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 6:39 pm

slizerd wrote:
Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:

dying

Awesome pick up line!

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:06 pm

Post removed...

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:13 pm

Post removed...

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:14 pm

Post removed...

dellara · Post by **dellara** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:34 pm

shineoncrazydiamond wrote:PT64 went very well but I could easily get my ass handed to me by 72 etc so I'm not getting complacent. Also, I felt really unsure of some of the RC answers on the Doestoevsky passage and still want to get to where I'm finishing with a little more time left on most sections. LG drilling got me back up to speed but need to keep it up. I will say paying really close attention to subtle differences in wording on LR, and to conditional logic and associated contrapositives with some/most/many was really helpful. Also, making LG my experimental didn't hurt. We will see how double RCs go on Saturday.

Experimental LG: -1
LR1: -0 but barely finished in time
LG: -0
LR2: -0
RC: -1 but only had a minute to spare at the end.

the fuck @ "RC: -1 but only had a minute to spare at the end."

ONLY? -side eyes you hard-

roshan07 · Post by **roshan07** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:58 pm

just finished reviewing PT 54, and RC strikes again. idk why this keeps happening.

Score 169 / BR 172

RC -6
LR -1
LG -2
LR -2 (missed a super easy question cause I overthought it)

I HATE RC BUT I WILL FIX IT!!

shineoncrazydiamond · Post by **shineoncrazydiamond** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:20 pm

dellara wrote:
shineoncrazydiamond wrote:PT64 went very well but I could easily get my ass handed to me by 72 etc so I'm not getting complacent. Also, I felt really unsure of some of the RC answers on the Doestoevsky passage and still want to get to where I'm finishing with a little more time left on most sections. LG drilling got me back up to speed but need to keep it up. I will say paying really close attention to subtle differences in wording on LR, and to conditional logic and associated contrapositives with some/most/many was really helpful. Also, making LG my experimental didn't hurt. We will see how double RCs go on Saturday.

Experimental LG: -1
LR1: -0 but barely finished in time
LG: -0
LR2: -0
RC: -1 but only had a minute to spare at the end.
the fuck @ "RC: -1 but only had a minute to spare at the end."

ONLY? -side eyes you hard-

I probably shouldn't have phrased it like that because having any time to spare on RC is a huge improvement for me and I feel like I need a LOT of room for error. I just really don't trust myself on RC answers so not having time to review all the answers I marked now that I have gotten better at timing makes me nervous. I started out around -6 to -7 on RC, largely because of timing, and I found Manhattan really helpful. I definitely didn't finish the PT feeling like I rocked RC.

kapenak · Post by **kapenak** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:30 pm

Do people think that the most recent tests (PT 70+) are more difficult than earlier ones (mid 60's-70). I was consistently scoring 173+ on the 60's PTs but I've taken 73 and 71 and scored 168's on both... anybody with a similar experience???

shineoncrazydiamond · Post by **shineoncrazydiamond** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:33 pm

betterLawyerUP wrote:
shineoncrazydiamond wrote:PT64 went very well but I could easily get my ass handed to me by 72 etc so I'm not getting complacent. Also, I felt really unsure of some of the RC answers on the Doestoevsky passage and still want to get to where I'm finishing with a little more time left on most sections. LG drilling got me back up to speed but need to keep it up. I will say paying really close attention to subtle differences in wording on LR, and to conditional logic and associated contrapositives with some/most/many was really helpful. Also, making LG my experimental didn't hurt. We will see how double RCs go on Saturday.

Experimental LG: -1
LR1: -0 but barely finished in time
LG: -0
LR2: -0
RC: -1 but only had a minute to spare at the end.
lmao I just took PT64 today so its fresh in my memory. I am guessing u didnt struggle at all? I got 16,23 wrong on first LR which were kind of tough. 14,15,17,18 on the second LR which I havent looked at but its crazy you got none of them wrong thought they were pretty difficult.

And RC I thought I had decent understanding and got -7. 3 wrong in the evolution passage (did you not find the answers tricky? I thought the passage was ok but the answers were tricky). And 3 wrong in Dostoyevsky but I think mainly was a timing issue, q25 was ass.

It baffles me how you got a perfect basically, congrats though thats impressive im wayyyyy behind.

I wouldn't say you are behind! And I definitely wouldn't say that I breezed through it (or at least didn't feel like it while taking it). I'm not scoring like this on every PT and I was pleasantly surprised on this one. I did feel really confident about LR1 but I marked several on LR2 that I was kind of iffy about and may have gotten lucky. And for RC I always assume I bombed at least one passage so I was really surprised. For LR I definitely marked 14, 17, and 18 and even changed 17 to the correct answer last minute. I struggled with 17 a lot.

Also, I hate geology/earth science passages, of which there seem to be quite a few, and this test didn't have any, so I think that really helped in my case (and I studied biology in undergrad so I think that even though the evolution passage didn't test knowledge of bio I was comfortable with the subject matter and got through the passage really quickly, so I had time to wrestle with the answer choices, which I agree felt particularly tricky). So while I have scored well on previous PTs I do think I lucked out a little on this one and got content I felt better about. I also struggled with RC Q25.

I had been struggling with getting LR down to two and choosing the incorrect answer and worked earlier this week on really dissecting why incorrect answers are incorrect and correct ones make the most sense, and finding subtle shifts in wording from the question/argument to the answer choices that allowed me to eliminate wrong ones, although it often felt/(feels) like picking the least shitty answer among 5 shitty choices.

I'm pretty sure my next PT with double RCs will not be so hot.

betterLawyerUP · Post by **betterLawyerUP** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:48 pm

shineoncrazydiamond wrote:
betterLawyerUP wrote:
shineoncrazydiamond wrote:PT64 went very well but I could easily get my ass handed to me by 72 etc so I'm not getting complacent. Also, I felt really unsure of some of the RC answers on the Doestoevsky passage and still want to get to where I'm finishing with a little more time left on most sections. LG drilling got me back up to speed but need to keep it up. I will say paying really close attention to subtle differences in wording on LR, and to conditional logic and associated contrapositives with some/most/many was really helpful. Also, making LG my experimental didn't hurt. We will see how double RCs go on Saturday.

Experimental LG: -1
LR1: -0 but barely finished in time
LG: -0
LR2: -0
RC: -1 but only had a minute to spare at the end.
lmao I just took PT64 today so its fresh in my memory. I am guessing u didnt struggle at all? I got 16,23 wrong on first LR which were kind of tough. 14,15,17,18 on the second LR which I havent looked at but its crazy you got none of them wrong thought they were pretty difficult.

And RC I thought I had decent understanding and got -7. 3 wrong in the evolution passage (did you not find the answers tricky? I thought the passage was ok but the answers were tricky). And 3 wrong in Dostoyevsky but I think mainly was a timing issue, q25 was ass.

It baffles me how you got a perfect basically, congrats though thats impressive im wayyyyy behind.
I wouldn't say you are behind! And I definitely wouldn't say that I breezed through it (or at least didn't feel like it while taking it). I'm not scoring like this on every PT and I was pleasantly surprised on this one. I did feel really confident about LR1 but I marked several on LR2 that I was kind of iffy about and may have gotten lucky. And for RC I always assume I bombed at least one passage so I was really surprised. For LR I definitely marked 14, 17, and 18 and even changed 17 to the correct answer last minute. I struggled with 17 a lot.

Also, I hate geology/earth science passages, of which there seem to be quite a few, and this test didn't have any, so I think that really helped in my case (and I studied biology in undergrad so I think that even though the evolution passage didn't test knowledge of bio I was comfortable with the subject matter and got through the passage really quickly, so I had time to wrestle with the answer choices, which I agree felt particularly tricky). So while I have scored well on previous PTs I do think I lucked out a little on this one and got content I felt better about. I also struggled with RC Q25.

I had been struggling with getting LR down to two and choosing the incorrect answer and worked earlier this week on really dissecting why incorrect answers are incorrect and correct ones make the most sense, and finding subtle shifts in wording from the question/argument to the answer choices that allowed me to eliminate wrong ones, although it often felt/(feels) like picking the least shitty answer among 5 shitty choices.

I'm pretty sure my next PT with double RCs will not be so hot.

Thanks for the insight, I take solace that we hesitated on similar questions, though our paths diverged from there, lol.

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:12 pm

Post removed...

WorthlessDegree · Post by **WorthlessDegree** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:19 pm

Oh my gosh, just had the biggest revelation on RC. If I write BOTH the purpose of the paragraph and the content of the paragraph itself (each with 5 words or fewer), then the questions get SO much easier. Obviously this puts more work on the front end, but it's saving me so much time on the back end.

somethingElse · Post by **somethingElse** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:47 pm

Post removed...

flash21 · Post by **flash21** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 10:42 pm

god I'm so useless on days I PT. Blind reviewed half the test and cannot bring myself to do the rest

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 10:52 pm

Post removed...

WorthlessDegree · Post by **WorthlessDegree** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:01 pm

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:My games scores were all over the place. Chalking that up to hangry and cold meds.

My first PT (PT33, 4 section no break cept a pee break) was a bit of a step in the right direction.
173
LR1 -1
RC -4
LR2 -2
LG -3

kinda thought I did better on RC.

Had a cup of soup and dove into 34
168
RC -4
LR1 -3
LR2 -3
LG-5

Kinda annoyed because I thought I did better on LR and RC. I knew I was out of it for games. I think somewhere during the second test I just got too tired.

Definitely have noticed some payoffs from my LR reviewing, I really need to focus more on reviewing for RC.

Would you recommend those of us who struggle with endurance do 2 back to back?

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:03 pm

Post removed...

WorthlessDegree · Post by **WorthlessDegree** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:09 pm

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:
WorthlessDegree wrote:
Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:My games scores were all over the place. Chalking that up to hangry and cold meds.

My first PT (PT33, 4 section no break cept a pee break) was a bit of a step in the right direction.
173
LR1 -1
RC -4
LR2 -2
LG -3

kinda thought I did better on RC.

Had a cup of soup and dove into 34
168
RC -4
LR1 -3
LR2 -3
LG-5

Kinda annoyed because I thought I did better on LR and RC. I knew I was out of it for games. I think somewhere during the second test I just got too tired.

Definitely have noticed some payoffs from my LR reviewing, I really need to focus more on reviewing for RC.

Would you recommend those of us who struggle with endurance do 2 back to back?
That's why I'm doing it! That or the 6 section tests are a good way to kick you into shape.

How far out from the test would you recommend starting this?

nerdylsat · Post by **nerdylsat** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:24 pm

dellara wrote:I fuckin love the LG groove I get in test-mode. I feel like a mad scientist. I pray to the LSAC gods that I can get LG as my exp

+1. LG strains the brain the least. I think a RC exp would definitely suck.

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:37 pm

Post removed...

WorthlessDegree · Post by **WorthlessDegree** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:42 pm

Follow up-- what's a good drilling to PT ratio?

cheeseee · Post by **cheeseee** » Fri Nov 20, 2015 12:32 am

So is 1PT per day not recommended because of the intense concentration within a short amount of time? Then is it okay to take timed 5 sections with breaks everyday?

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Fri Nov 20, 2015 12:55 am

Post removed...

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Fri Nov 20, 2015 12:57 am

Post removed...