People who thought this test was easy Forum

[99.9luft]

Do they exist?

Seems like everyone is complaining about the test, the dumb !Kung and Zones for sure, but did anyone find this test easy?

Seems like with the amount of people scoring upwards of 175 on here on PTs, there has to be some folks with this opinion.

If this exam had, say, June 12's LG section, i'd say that it was overall easy, yes. I think they threw in the zones LG section (experimental in Oct 2010) to balance out the test, but I am pretty biased (and bitter) of course.

[VUSisterRayVU]

Do they exist?

Seems like everyone is complaining about the test, the dumb !Kung and Zones for sure, but did anyone find this test easy?

Seems like with the amount of people scoring upwards of 175 on here on PTs, there has to be some folks with this opinion.

If this exam had, say, June 12's LG section, i'd say that it was overall easy, yes. I think they threw in the zones LG section (experimental in Oct 2010) to balance out the test, but I am pretty biased (and bitter) of course.

I'd say it was easy just because 66's LG was easy. But if you replace 67's LGs with 'average' LGs, I'd say the test was right around average. The big question in my head is whether LR was actually easy or if I just got better at recognizing 60s LRs. A lot of the Qs that would have been hard were really REALLY similar to Qs on the last 5 PTs that I got wrong, so I just 'ported' tcr and that thought process.

[99.9luft]

Do they exist?

Seems like everyone is complaining about the test, the dumb !Kung and Zones for sure, but did anyone find this test easy?

Seems like with the amount of people scoring upwards of 175 on here on PTs, there has to be some folks with this opinion.

If this exam had, say, June 12's LG section, i'd say that it was overall easy, yes. I think they threw in the zones LG section (experimental in Oct 2010) to balance out the test, but I am pretty biased (and bitter) of course.

I'd say it was easy just because 66's LG was easy. But if you replace 67's LGs with 'average' LGs, I'd say the test was right around average. The big question in my head is whether LR was actually easy or if I just got better at recognizing 60s LRs. A lot of the Qs that would have been hard were really REALLY similar to Qs on the last 5 PTs that I got wrong, so I just 'ported' tcr and that thought process.

completely agree with you...

I, too am in serious doubts right now - did my flying through both sections of LR (LR2 felt almost too easy) indicate the learnt skills from PTing + adrenaline rush...or did i just gloss over things instead of being critical?

I have this feeling that after the LG fiasco, I abandoned some of my critical methods (e.g. crossing out wrong answers first, etc.). Not sure. Or maybe everything was actually easier because we practiced. What bothers me is that with more time away from the test I doubt my performance even more, haha.

[CardozoLaw09]

Someone earlier said those that take this PT in the future probably won't find it as difficult as we're finding it to be right now - I agree with that sentiment. Games weren't all that challenging if you didn't panic.. the first one was hard for a first game, but once you figured what it was asking then the questions turned out to be real easy to answer. LR's easiness compensated for the dense RC passages. I'm predicting a -11 curve. As far as the comparison to June, this test experience was immensely better in terms of the after-affect -- I think we can all agree June's was flat out weird (LR particularly)

[VUSisterRayVU]

Someone earlier said those that take this PT in the future probably won't find it as difficult as we're finding it to be right now - I agree with that sentiment. Games weren't all that challenging if you didn't panic.. the first one was hard for a first game, but once you figured what it was asking then the questions turned out to be real easy to answer. LR's easiness compensated for the dense RC passages. I'm predicting a -11 curve. As far as the comparison to June, this test experience was immensely better in terms of the after-affect -- I think we can all agree June's was flat out weird (LR particularly)

I didn't take June but I did the PT. Nothing was weird about it.

[beautyistruth]

Depends on how they take this test. If they take it early in their prep as an untimed, then it will probably be one of the easiest tests. Games are all extremely doable un-timed, anyways, logical reasoning was straight-forward, and reading was dense, but not too ambiguous (?) (...knock on wood).

Or if they did what I stupidly did, and cut themselves a lot of slack on games and timing.

[jone7007]

Other than Game 4, I thought this test was pretty easy. I wouldn't be surprised if I was 100% on the first 3 and -2 to -4 just because of question 4. I only had 1 question on LR I really felt tripped up on. Usually I feel that way about 2-4 per LR section. There were very few formal logic/parallel reasoning type questions which are the ones I usually miss. Which made LR feel really easy. I thought the RC just slightly easy but I usually have trouble with time on RC.

[heyunthebushes]

I did feel like the zones question was tough, and I had to guess on one question after eliminating 3 choices. So, unless I completely misread a rule somewhere, I feel confident I got no worse than a -2 in logic games, and it was the only section I felt was difficult. I breezed through all of the other sections with more than enough time to go back and check questions I was unsure about until I could articulate a justification I was happy with. Not saying it was easy, but I felt like I was in the zone. I walked out feeling like I had just kicked the LSAT in the nuts, and I was hoping for a 172 or 173, but if it was as hard as many seem to think, I feel like a generous curve puts a 175 within reach.

[nick_scheu]

I did feel like the zones question was tough, and I had to guess on one question after eliminating 3 choices. So, unless I completely misread a rule somewhere, I feel confident I got no worse than a -2 in logic games, and it was the only section I felt was difficult. I breezed through all of the other sections with more than enough time to go back and check questions I was unsure about until I could articulate a justification I was happy with. Not saying it was easy, but I felt like I was in the zone. I walked out feeling like I had just kicked the LSAT in the nuts, and I was hoping for a 172 or 173, but if it was as hard as many seem to think, I feel like a generous curve puts a 175 within reach.

This more or less reflects my feelings, though I probably got a -3 or -4 on LG. The rest seemed pretty easy. I'm worried that I may have missed some stuff on LG/RC based on the other opinions here, though.

[noobishned]

Just so I am clear about the LG.. Did you guys think it was hard because of the rules and questions or the wording in the rules and questions??

[annet]

Just so I am clear about the LG.. Did you guys think it was hard because of the rules and questions or the wording in the rules and questions??

From what I remember the main problem was the wording and length of the rules combine with the length of the questions. I don't think the questions themselves were hugely difficult types (although I'm not sure I even read the last one) but so much of it was first, figuring out what the game was saying, and then figuring out what the questions were asking. But, like I've said elsewhere, I had all of 5 minutes for this game so time was by far the biggest factor.

[boredtodeath]

I thought this test was one of the easier ones I've taken. The second section of LR was somewhat tough for me on a few questions, but I thought every other section was easier than others I have taken on PTs. The RC was pretty easy, don't get why so many people are complaining about that. I actually read the book that the !Kung passage was referencing for a class in college though, so maybe that helped me somewhat on that part of RC. I though LG was pretty easy as well, the second and third games were cake, the first was actually pretty tough imo, and zones didn't seem to difficult, I just didn't have enough time to answer all the questions.

[noobishned]

Just so I am clear about the LG.. Did you guys think it was hard because of the rules and questions or the wording in the rules and questions??

From what I remember the main problem was the wording and length of the rules combine with the length of the questions. I don't think the questions themselves were hugely difficult types (although I'm not sure I even read the last one) but so much of it was first, figuring out what the game was saying, and then figuring out what the questions were asking. But, like I've said elsewhere, I had all of 5 minutes for this game so time was by far the biggest factor.

Ok. I see. I am sure I would have had a really hard time with the game if I had done it last.