Difficulty of June 2010 LG (POLL) Forum

[itseightfortyfive]

. I nearly wanted to curse myself out like I had tourette's cause I had no time left to go back and redo it. .

HAHAHA. totally know that feeling!!!!

[Ragged]

I got killed by the interns. No gimmi questions and no easy inferences. I really can't wait to see the game and firgure out what inference I failed to make.

I voted 5. other games were easier but no gimmis even the sequencing was not so simple. Hoping that it will make the curve generous. And please please let me have guessed correctly on atleast 3 intern questions.... !!!!

[theavrock]

I took dinos for real in '09 and this one for real today and I feel that this LG was easier. Not necessarily by far but definitely easier.

The first two were cake and the mulch one was a lot easier than the grants from '09. Interns and dino's were on the same level but I still feel like dinos was crushing compared to interns.

[mkr5u]

I don't think the mulch question was that bad until you took a moment to think about it. By the time I realized how it worked, I barely had enough time to consider the fourth game. ERGH...

[Sammi]

This thread really surprises me. I thought the mulch was way easy, and not even in the same realm of the Dinos of PT57.

+1

[a11 1n]

This thread really surprises me. I thought the mulch was way easy, and not even in the same realm of the Dinos of PT57.

For sure. It had 2 rules and 2 variables. If anything the Tuscany etc. game was comparable to dinos

The Tuscany game was definitely the hardest game, I had to guess on the last 4...man I hope at least one of those was C...

[splitterhopeful]

The weirdness of the third LG really threw me and the fourth one was very difficult. Hardest LG section, for me, since the PTs in the 30s (and I did all LGs from 20-59). I really hope my educated guesses were right

[kkklick]

I can't even remember my guesses from the last logic game. Either B, C, or D but not all in one row. Wow I either did really mediocre or completely bombed

[Chimica]

So I think I made some error in the game set-up for 2 (which should have been easy). I set it up (which took a little while, but once I had the diagram, I figured I could zoom through), did the first question, went to the second and could.not.get.it. and the third made no sense either.

From the sounds of it, Game 2 was as easy as I initially thought, so I must have messed up something early on. It's annoying, as mulch was pretty easy and I was doing OK on 4 before time sarted to run out.


If I bombed LG, I will rewrite because these are learnable.

[OklahomasOK]

This thread really surprises me. I thought the mulch was way easy, and not even in the same realm of the Dinos of PT57.

For sure. It had 2 rules and 2 variables. If anything the Tuscany etc. game was comparable to dinos

Felt the exact same way. I took quite a bit of time on the 2nd and 4th game.

I thought the 3rd game was just a matter of juggling the rules in your head and making hypos. I got it pretty quickly and was elated to get to the last game with 10 minutes left... then I got worked.

[whatjusthappened]

If all of you are as pissed as I am about the ambiguity of the term on game four, let me refer you to this thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=119861

[3|ink]

I can see this post as a the topic of a logical reasoning question.

'Someone created a poll on the TLS website to rate the difficulty of the June 2010 LSAT. The participants were asked to rate the test between 1 (very easy) and 5 (very hard). An overwhelming majority of those who participated in the poll voted 4 (hard). Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the June 2010 LSAT was hard.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the above argument?

a.) Of those who participated in the poll, an overwhelming majority did not adequately prepare for the test.
b.) People who felt the test was easy were far less likely to waste their time on forums.
c.) People who felt the test was difficult were far more likely to waste their time on forums.
d.) Most of the participants misread the poll question to read 'How would you do Megan Fox?'
e.) The argument takes for granted that participants voted objectively on the day after they took the exam.'

[truffleshuffle]

[strike]If all of you are as pissed as I am about the ambiguity of the term on game four,[/strike] If you refuse to accept that you made a mistake and feel that blaming the test is more appropriate let me refer you to this thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=119861

[bedefan]

Game 4 was waaaay harder than the dinos, if you ask me. I was cranking right along, had about 9 minutes left when I reached game 4, a little slower than I'd been practicing recently, then... ugh. Spent some time with the set-up, couldn't come up with a defining inference, thought the questions would help me out, then I got gob-smacked. First question was fine, I think I might've got the second one the only way I could figure out (guess-and-check) though even on that one I wasn't sure--just didn't seem to be a correct answer to the thing. But then I had to put down, ahem, educated guesses for the rest of them.

I voted a 4, assuming there was an inference to be made that I just didn't see... I'd been testing at -0 or -1 on my LG sections, if that matters, and had a -0 and about three minutes to spare on the infamous dinos section. (Which I didn't even know was infamous till reading this thread.)

[IBThatGuy]

I'd be interested to hear from those who thought that, on a scale of 1-5, this was a 1. If someone is exceptionally good at that section, such that they didn't even notice a difference, the section would be at least average. I can see someone feeling like, for them, some of the items or games were a little easier. But a 1?

[WhatSarahSaid]

Is 3.5 an option?

The first two games were pretty easy. The mulch game wasn't hard, but it certainly was different than pretty much all of the recent tests. The last game was moderately tough, but I don't think it was on the level of the dino game.

[BigA]

weird, I thought mulch was one of the easiest games I've ever seen. And I'm not even good at logic games. I was actually kinda pissed because I felt like I may have wasted a couple minutes wondering if that was all there is to the game. I hope I didn't miss anything big. So then I had about six or seven minutes on the last game and couldn't even figure out one question. It was terrible.

[simpson89]

I can see this post as a the topic of a logical reasoning question.

'Someone created a poll on the TLS website to rate the difficulty of the June 2010 LSAT. The participants were asked to rate the test between 1 (very easy) and 5 (very hard). An overwhelming majority of those who participated in the poll voted 4 (hard). Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the June 2010 LSAT was hard.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the above argument?

a.) Of those who participated in the poll, an overwhelming majority did not adequately prepare for the test.
b.) People who felt the test was easy were far less likely to waste their time on forums.
c.) People who felt the test was difficult were far more likely to waste their time on forums.
d.) Most of the participants misread the poll question to read 'How would you do Megan Fox?'
e.) The argument takes for granted that participants voted objectively on the day after they took the exam.'

Voted 4, but I'm going with E. Upon looking at the questions now they weren't as bad, but going to my internship today and realizing the game 4 deduction made me want to punch something!

[baconpuffs]

I made the proper deductions on the Tuscany game and actually found it really easy by the time I got to it, but I also did it last because the sheer volume of rules scared me. But I spent way more time on games 2 and 3 than average for me (I spent over 10 minutes on mulch), so I had to guess on the last two questions of Tuscany. Overall, I gave it a 4.

FWIW, I had no problems figuring out the terms on Tuscany, and honestly have no idea which term was problematic for the people making a challenge.