Powerscore Bibles sufficient? Forum

[Daily_Double]

High 160s, low 170s. But I didn't take a PT, excuding my diagnostic, until after I did both the bibles and Manhattan's books twice, then drilled LG and LR.

[CardozoLaw09]

but are not limited to

FTFY dude; other than the things you listed, what else does powerscore do better?

[Daily_Double]

That's it, judging from my memory, which is subject to misinterpret things from time to time, so I felt forced to add the phrase "including, but not limited to."

[ManoftheHour]

In regards to PTs:

PS got me to the 160s.

Got a 162 on the real LSAT

Manhattan got me to the 170s.

I have yet to take the real LSAT after doing Manhattan prep. I'll let you know how it goes after June 10th.

[jrsbaseball5]

If you are spending until January setting up a study schedule then I would absolutely recommend taking a look at both Powerscore and Manhattan. I would also say take a look at some of the free stuff that 7Sage, Velocity, and LSATblog have to offer as well to see what fits you best. The key to getting a high score is to find the method that works efficiently for you and then to execute it come test time. You may not follow the exact method proscribed by the books you read, but you can find what works for you.

Also, though I know there is a lot of hate for Princeton, and I don't have any reason to endorse them, I did find the books for one of their courses at Goodwill and bought the entire set for $15. I won't end up doing the actual coursework, but it was a very inexpensive way to pick up 12 preptests. Basically, I'm saying be on the look out for good study material since you are planning so far out in advance.

[Clearly]

In my opinion, if you're looking for efficiency, then the LGB and RCB are unnecessary, however the LRB is at least important. Manhattan does a better job at both LG and RC, however going through both the LGB and RCB allowed me to look at different approaches, and while I ended up not using any of the methods in those books, doing them helped me see things differently.

What method did you end up using? Just curious. Did they have any negative effect on you? Did they confuse you more?

Well, I've developed a method for each section, it's basically the same as Manhattan in every regard except for LG. I guess there are some differences in LR as well. I'll provide a broad overview of how I see things real quick:

LG - there's three types of games. Grouping, Sequencing, and Hybrids. That's it. For every single game, I use basic conditionals, I diagram the rules, then I connect them, if possible, after those steps, I do a quick hypo, at this point I know what questions commonly show up, so for example, if I'm looking at an in-out game, I'll do hypos with max/min. Doing this hypo at the beginning reinforces the rules for me and it's also when I look for inferences. I don't use any methods mentioned in the books except for Manhattan's Open Board method, which is the best way to solve the Zephr Airlines game.

LR - Besides the differences in classifying the families, I try to prephrase answers often. And I define prephrasing as diagramming, looking at the gap, and/or actually prephrasing an answer. Usually I do two of these at least. My main difference here is really diagramming, I diagram a lot. I diagram MBT questions, I diagram formal logic questions, I diagram S/A questions, I diagram parallel questions. And I still finish LR in 29/30 minutes. Diagramming makes me more accurate, and accuracy increases timing.

Did they have any negative effect on you? Did they confuse you more?

Hard to say really, I suppose the only method that may have had a negative effect on me was Manhattan's method of solving In-Out games, but even then, the book itself recommends using basic conditionals, and honestly I think that doing Manhattan's methods and Powerscore's methods helped me to simplify LG into it's most base form. In terms of LR, no real negative things here. Powerscore was a great intro, and Manhattan was great for looking at the broad picture. Once again, I think Powerscore suffers from an emphasis on the trees, whereas Manhattan looks at the forrest. This is also the case for RC.

Just find what works for you. I couldn't be different from this poster in any more possible ways lol. I diagrammed exactly 0 things on the LSAT excluding LG. Not one LR, and I never notate/underline anything in RC. I read and used all this literature when I was studying for the test, and personally found PS stuff bloated and largely useless, although I concede they do a better job with formal logic than MLSAT. The RCB is literally nothing, it has so little in it of instructional quality I wouldn't recommend it as anything but a doorstop. MLSAT's RC guide can't be more than 150 pages and nails everything that matters. As far as the LGB goes, I think its great to get an understanding of games, and it works slowly enough that it lays a good foundation, but I also guarantee that few high scorers who used it uses their methods meticulously...Its far better at helping you understand games than it is at providing you an efficient system to actually do them. To diagram every not rule etc isn't usually done by high scorers. Frankly if you want to be best prepared for LG, the only system to use is Velocity. Dave really pays attention to important things that other companies miss like how to effectively use prior work.

The reality is once you have a basic understanding of how to do things, the real thing to improve your score is practice, and lots of it. Adapting whatever system you find to your skills and more importantly taking tests consistently enough that you can really spot where you need more practice, and getting to a point where the test is second nature, eventually you'll practically auto-pilot through most LR questions if you work hard enough and take enough of them.

[jk148706]

In regards to PTs:

PS got me to the 160s.

Got a 162 on the real LSAT

Manhattan got me to the 170s.

I have yet to take the real LSAT after doing Manhattan prep. I'll let you know how it goes after June 10th.

I just finished PS and now going to Manhattan. Hoping it pushes me to 170 territory too.

[supernma]

In regards to PTs:

PS got me to the 160s.

Got a 162 on the real LSAT

Manhattan got me to the 170s.

I have yet to take the real LSAT after doing Manhattan prep. I'll let you know how it goes after June 10th.

Nice. Low 170s I'm assuming? Yea it's looking like I'll go through both. Do you think I should go through them before January and then use January-June of 2014 doing nothign but drilling? Or would I have enough time to incorporate the reading into the plan beginning in January. I'm assuming that in order to make drilling worthwhile, I should first have gone through the bibles and Manhattan's books so I understand what I'm doing.

[supernma]

Also, any opinions on whether I should read Manhattan's first? Or the other way around.

[Dr. Dre]

Powerscore —> Manhattan LSAT —> PT

[jk148706]

Powerscore —> Manhattan LSAT —> PT

What I'm doing

[Dr. Dre]

OP, you got to raise that GPA if you're considering YHS.

[dw3]

CCN should be fine with a 3.6 170+. Money would potentially be in play as well.

[NoWorries]

I have just used the PS bibles and PT's. Practicing around 174-177 so I'd say they are definitely sufficient.

[dw3]

I have just used the PS bibles and PT's. Practicing around 174-177 so I'd say they are definitely sufficient.

Very nice. How long have you been studying?

[dw3]

Assuming around 4ish months?

[NoWorries]

I have just used the PS bibles and PT's. Practicing around 174-177 so I'd say they are definitely sufficient.

Very nice. How long have you been studying?

I've studied sporadically for over a year. A few hours a week from January until May and have been going hard this month.

[ManoftheHour]

Nice. Low 170s I'm assuming? Yea it's looking like I'll go through both. Do you think I should go through them before January and then use January-June of 2014 doing nothign but drilling? Or would I have enough time to incorporate the reading into the plan beginning in January. I'm assuming that in order to make drilling worthwhile, I should first have gone through the bibles and Manhattan's books so I understand what I'm doing.

Yep. Honestly, I'd be ecstatic for a 168. JUNE is coming.

Powerscore —> Manhattan LSAT —> PT

TITCR

[LDVM4334]

169 + lower scores + prescribed Adderall, re-taking simply so I can get into UMich and comparable schools...

Currently ex-GF (JUST broke up) has Manhattan books...I am not incorrect to bug her to borrow them, from what I gather here? Or is it too late?

Keep in mind Adderall can turn things that take days into things that take hours, but I haven't taken a real test since June 11 (169) and am not doing as well as I'd expect/hope.

Getting stuck on games, mostly, which never happened before. I'd imagine there is some/plenty of rust, but it also seems that the easy games have just gotten...harder?...which takes time away from the hard games.

Can I learn Manhattan quickly? I'm still mostly killing LR, which is half the test obviously, and RC was always my "weakness", but I am doing better on that as well...

LG is what's hurting me now, the part that I took as a given before.

Just learned about 7sage and am watching their explanations as I type this...will the Manhattan book help?

I've read LGB and took TestMasters in 2009 so am familiar with that, just seems the newer games are more hybrid, or maybe that's just my excuse for my inability to make quality diagrams and score better.

[Dr. Dre]

Currently ex-GF (JUST broke up)

You know what, fuck your ex, you're better off without her. Now dominate that LSAT.

Also, when are you taking it?

[sublime]

..

[The-Specs]

Personally I have found after doing both PS and MLSAT that Manhattan owns RC (RCB was almost worthless for me and Manhattan for RC changed the way I tested) but I liked LRB better than Manhattan's LR. For games I though blueprints new LG guide was killer. All together with over 30 PT's I am score right where I wanted to be. If I had a son taking the LSAT those are the three books I would have give him.

[sublime]

..

[LDVM4334]

Currently ex-GF (JUST broke up)

You know what, fuck your ex, you're better off without her. Now dominate that LSAT.

Also, when are you taking it?

June 10, in literally the same room as her. And it's pretty much entirely my fault, so the self-empowerment what not doesn't really help.

[sublime]

..