The struggle continues... Forum

[xmking07]

reread Powerscore LGB, and do each lg packet about 3 times. That's really the only thing I did and I went from at least -10 to a consistent -0

Manhattan LG may help. I really only found their relative ordering to be significantly better.

[sam62188]

THIS!!! This is the PROBLEM!!!! I have no strategy for each question. After I diagram my life gets stressful. Does Manhattan LG help with that?

After reading through your posts I think maybe trying something different might help. I am weak in all 3 areas of the LSAT and although the approaches by test prep companies for LR helped me a lot, the strategies for both LG and RC did not help me very much.

Towards the end of my prep for the June '13 I was getting 13/23 on the LG section. So I started playing with different approaches and ended up liking this one:

1. Determine the type of game
2. Diagram rules
3. Do the elimination question immediately to reinforce the rules
4. Do conditional questions (ex: if X is 3rd then where must Y be), diagram the situation and plug in any variable that fits to get the answer.
5. Do the absolute questions (ex: which could/must/cannot be true) last and refer to the correct answers and diagrams made for other questions to eliminate answer choices.
6. If necessary diagram remaining answer choices from absolute questions to see what is the correct one.

Now I do realize this method is flawed but it is a proactive way to handle the section and can be easily replicated each time. So even if you get a game that looks insane you won't lock up and panic.

I consistently get 20-21 on LG sections with this method. I don't know if this will work for you, but I got frustrated with conventional methods because I had a really hard time looking for the unstated deductions without attacking the questions first.

[Br3v]

Well what I tend to do is make a mini diagram for each option for each question and I just think it takes me far too long.

So would you all recommend I start back at Chapter One and then work through it by type? And not move on until I master the type? Only problem is I really hated LGB, and I'd prefer to use Manhattan. Is that too detrimental?

Yes come on. PS tells you not to do that! Make one basic diagram. This is an easy fix so there is the upside.

[sublime]

..

[okaygo]

Well what I tend to do is make a mini diagram for each option for each question and I just think it takes me far too long.

So would you all recommend I start back at Chapter One and then work through it by type? And not move on until I master the type? Only problem is I really hated LGB, and I'd prefer to use Manhattan. Is that too detrimental?

Yes come on. PS tells you not to do that! Make one basic diagram. This is an easy fix so there is the upside.

I think/hope he means he has his basic diagram, but for like "could be true" questions that he can't infer, he makes a mini diagram to test the AC's.

Yes. This is what I was saying.

[okaygo]

THIS!!! This is the PROBLEM!!!! I have no strategy for each question. After I diagram my life gets stressful. Does Manhattan LG help with that?

After reading through your posts I think maybe trying something different might help. I am weak in all 3 areas of the LSAT and although the approaches by test prep companies for LR helped me a lot, the strategies for both LG and RC did not help me very much.

Towards the end of my prep for the June '13 I was getting 13/23 on the LG section. So I started playing with different approaches and ended up liking this one:

1. Determine the type of game
2. Diagram rules
3. Do the elimination question immediately to reinforce the rules
4. Do conditional questions (ex: if X is 3rd then where must Y be), diagram the situation and plug in any variable that fits to get the answer.
5. Do the absolute questions (ex: which could/must/cannot be true) last and refer to the correct answers and diagrams made for other questions to eliminate answer choices.
6. If necessary diagram remaining answer choices from absolute questions to see what is the correct one.

Now I do realize this method is flawed but it is a proactive way to handle the section and can be easily replicated each time. So even if you get a game that looks insane you won't lock up and panic.

I consistently get 20-21 on LG sections with this method. I don't know if this will work for you, but I got frustrated with conventional methods because I had a really hard time looking for the unstated deductions without attacking the questions first.

I definitely see where you're going with this method. I can see potential for sure.

[sublime]

..

[okaygo]

I definitely need to get away from brute forcing my way through LG. it's seriously ruining my score from consistent 165+ and as a URM with a 3.59 I just refuse to let LG keep me from going to my dream school.

[sublime]

..

[okaygo]

I definitely need to get away from brute forcing my way through LG. it's seriously ruining my score from consistent 165+ and as a URM with a 3.59 I just refuse to let LG keep me from going to my dream school.

Ehhh, I made the decision that I am probably not going to ever be able to look at a game and have it completely figured out it two minutes, so I should try something else. I am still going to read MLSAT and reread the LGB to see how it goes, but I am hoping Velocity works out and several posters I trust have recommended it.

I am only about 1/5 of the way through it (the sections we have covered I am -0 pretty much every time in 5-6 min - but they are the most simple types), but as I go through it more, I will let you know how it works for me, if you want.

Yes, that would be much appreciated!

[sublime]

..

[magickware]

I definitely need to get away from brute forcing my way through LG. it's seriously ruining my score from consistent 165+ and as a URM with a 3.59 I just refuse to let LG keep me from going to my dream school.

There's nothing wrong with brute forcing. You just need to get faster at it, and that requires you to just do more games and build familiarity.

There's a really simple way to go about building inferences on LG. Just look for things that connect between rules, note them, and then move on. The problems begin when people don't even bother to do this.

Most inferences will pop up if you just look at how the rules and the stimulus interact with one another. Take your time and look for it; don't bother to time yourself.