The Official June 2017 Study Group Forum

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

I've had 2 days where I haven't done much of anything well and I'm just not understanding why. Sections where I'm -6 in games -6 in RC -5 in LR. Not finishing games in time, missing easy LR. It's real disheartening. I'm hoping this is just a phase where I have to stop and reassess and then get a breakthrough.


I've been taking sections from PTs not as PTs but just timed sections but I might have to whip out the drilling packets

[zkyggi]

I've had 2 days where I haven't done much of anything well and I'm just not understanding why. Sections where I'm -6 in games -6 in RC -5 in LR. Not finishing games in time, missing easy LR. It's real disheartening. I'm hoping this is just a phase where I have to stop and reassess and then get a breakthrough.


I've been taking sections from PTs not as PTs but just timed sections but I might have to whip out the drilling packets

You've been going well enough that I think you just need a break.

[Slippin' Jimmy]

Are you reading for structure now?

Yes I am, although I don't diagram at all, most of my RC strategy comes from the Trainer. And I have noticed that RC does get noticeably harder in the 60s, I've gotten several of the old ones perfect and with time to spare in timed drills. I still think the -8 was unusually uncharacteristic of me though, for instance I got -2 on RC in PT 65 and -3 in PT 66 when I took those full timed PTs. I think a big part of my sink was I sort of lost respect for the section, and stopped doing RC maintenance.

[zkyggi]

Are you reading for structure now?

Yes I am, although I don't diagram at all, most of my RC strategy comes from the Trainer. And I have noticed that RC does get noticeably harder in the 60s, I've gotten several of the old ones perfect and with time to spare in timed drills. I still think the -8 was unusually uncharacteristic of me though, for instance I got -2 on RC in PT 65 and -3 in PT 66 when I took those full timed PTs. I think a big part of my sink was I sort of lost respect for the section, and stopped doing RC maintenance.

Ah I see. I haven't checked out the trainer so I don't know how much it differs from my own. Probably not too much. I'm sure that your drilling strategy will pay off come June.

[Platopus]

PT 65 today: LR 1 -0, LG -1, RC -6 (lol), LR 2 -1, 93/101; Scaled =175

My best LR performance to date, but of course I think they were a bit easier due to that insane RC. Either way, I'm pretty content with a 175 after a full day at work. I felt really relaxed this test, partly because I knew it had a huge curve, but I think there's still a lesson to be learned here. I felt a little panicky during the first 10 q's of LR 1, but once I mellowed out, it was smooth sailing and I ended up with about 6 minutes to spare. Honestly being on the look out for those subtle, but incorrect prephases really kept me on my toes. I felt like I recognized 2-3 questions that I may have mistakenly fallen for if I weren't careful.

[zkyggi]

PT 65 today: LR 1 -0, LG -1, RC -6 (lol), LR 2 -1, 93/101; Scaled =175

My best LR performance to date, but of course I think they were a bit easier due to that insane RC. Either way, I'm pretty content with a 175 after a full day at work. I felt really relaxed this test, partly because I knew it had a huge curve, but I think there's still a lesson to be learned here. I felt a little panicky during the first 10 q's of LR 1, but once I mellowed out, it was smooth sailing and I ended up with about 6 minutes to spare. Honestly being on the look out for those subtle, but incorrect prephases really kept me on my toes. I felt like I recognized 2-3 questions that I may have mistakenly fallen for if I weren't careful.

Great score! Which RC passage(s) got you? You are in really good shape. Imo, once you notice LR prephrase traps, the more recent LR is similar in difficulty to older LR.

[Platopus]

PT 65 today: LR 1 -0, LG -1, RC -6 (lol), LR 2 -1, 93/101; Scaled =175

My best LR performance to date, but of course I think they were a bit easier due to that insane RC. Either way, I'm pretty content with a 175 after a full day at work. I felt really relaxed this test, partly because I knew it had a huge curve, but I think there's still a lesson to be learned here. I felt a little panicky during the first 10 q's of LR 1, but once I mellowed out, it was smooth sailing and I ended up with about 6 minutes to spare. Honestly being on the look out for those subtle, but incorrect prephases really kept me on my toes. I felt like I recognized 2-3 questions that I may have mistakenly fallen for if I weren't careful.

Great score! Which RC passage(s) got you? You are in really good shape. Imo, once you notice LR prephrase traps, the more recent LR is similar in difficulty to older LR.

I want to say it was a split between the blackmail and the Netherlands farming research. I felt like I had a better grasp on the blackmail passage, but pretty sure you could hold a gun to my head and I wouldn't be able to tell you anything about the farming passage.

[zkyggi]

PT 65 today: LR 1 -0, LG -1, RC -6 (lol), LR 2 -1, 93/101; Scaled =175

My best LR performance to date, but of course I think they were a bit easier due to that insane RC. Either way, I'm pretty content with a 175 after a full day at work. I felt really relaxed this test, partly because I knew it had a huge curve, but I think there's still a lesson to be learned here. I felt a little panicky during the first 10 q's of LR 1, but once I mellowed out, it was smooth sailing and I ended up with about 6 minutes to spare. Honestly being on the look out for those subtle, but incorrect prephases really kept me on my toes. I felt like I recognized 2-3 questions that I may have mistakenly fallen for if I weren't careful.

Great score! Which RC passage(s) got you? You are in really good shape. Imo, once you notice LR prephrase traps, the more recent LR is similar in difficulty to older LR.

I want to say it was a split between the blackmail and the Netherlands farming research. I felt like I had a better grasp on the blackmail passage, but pretty sure you could hold a gun to my head and I wouldn't be able to tell you anything about the farming passage.

I went -4 on the section and went -3 on the farming passage. The AC's were hard and the passage was hard. The PTs in the 60s have some rough really RC passages.

[Platopus]

PT 65 today: LR 1 -0, LG -1, RC -6 (lol), LR 2 -1, 93/101; Scaled =175

My best LR performance to date, but of course I think they were a bit easier due to that insane RC. Either way, I'm pretty content with a 175 after a full day at work. I felt really relaxed this test, partly because I knew it had a huge curve, but I think there's still a lesson to be learned here. I felt a little panicky during the first 10 q's of LR 1, but once I mellowed out, it was smooth sailing and I ended up with about 6 minutes to spare. Honestly being on the look out for those subtle, but incorrect prephases really kept me on my toes. I felt like I recognized 2-3 questions that I may have mistakenly fallen for if I weren't careful.

Great score! Which RC passage(s) got you? You are in really good shape. Imo, once you notice LR prephrase traps, the more recent LR is similar in difficulty to older LR.

I want to say it was a split between the blackmail and the Netherlands farming research. I felt like I had a better grasp on the blackmail passage, but pretty sure you could hold a gun to my head and I wouldn't be able to tell you anything about the farming passage.

I went -4 on the section and went -3 on the farming passage. The AC's were hard and the passage was hard. The PTs in the 60s have some rough really RC passages.

I may be misinformed, but I am under the impression that the mid-late 60's are the hardest, especially for RC, and they tend to mellow out a little bit more in recent tests. No data points or anything to back this up, but I recall reading it somewhere on here.

[Saylor1720]

I have been hermitted in my LSAT bunker. I have improved my RC and LG to my goal scores. I have been having a difficult time with LR. This issue is not any specific question type (flaw was bothering me, I've gotten 20+ straight correct on my last PTs). My issue is that I get the majority of my wrong between 15-21. I get 4-6 wrong in a section typically, and at least 3 of them are between 15-21. This is getting increasingly annoying, to the point where it's in the back of my mind while I drill or PT. I've been going through the books (MH, Powerscore, Trainer) to brush up on my technique and drilling LR daily, it's just not clicking. I feel like I'm running out of time for "break" as well. Ugh.

I went from question first, to stem first the last few weeks, saw improvement early, then regressed back to the mean. Might switch back to question first to see if it changes something.

The other thing I might try is doing 1-15, then doing 21-25/26 then return to do 16-20.

Any one have any advice for this? This is my biggest problem and holding me back from my goal score.

[Platopus]

I have been hermitted in my LSAT bunker. I have improved my RC and LG to my goal scores. I have been having a difficult time with LR. This issue is not any specific question type (flaw was bothering me, I've gotten 20+ straight correct on my last PTs). My issue is that I get the majority of my wrong between 15-21. I get 4-6 wrong in a section typically, and at least 3 of them are between 15-21. This is getting increasingly annoying, to the point where it's in the back of my mind while I drill or PT. I've been going through the books (MH, Powerscore, Trainer) to brush up on my technique and drilling LR daily, it's just not clicking. I feel like I'm running out of time for "break" as well. Ugh.

I went from question first, to stem first the last few weeks, saw improvement early, then regressed back to the mean. Might switch back to question first to see if it changes something.

The other thing I might try is doing 1-15, then doing 21-25/26 then return to do 16-20.

Any one have any advice for this? This is my biggest problem and holding me back from my goal score.

For what it's worth, I'm a question stem first kinda guy, always. In response to your difficulties in the 15-20 range, try hitting 20-26 first and see if it helps. LR is tough, but you can still make gains. However, improvement is going to come from review. Don't just review the question, review your reasoning. Why did you pick that AC? Did you miss a key word? Did you feel rushed? Did you not read an AC as thoroughly as you could have? I have confidence that you know how to reason through the question, but you need to figure out what goes on in your brain when you pick the wrong AC. I started doing a *little* better when I stopped 2nd guessing myself so much.

[Saylor1720]

I have been hermitted in my LSAT bunker. I have improved my RC and LG to my goal scores. I have been having a difficult time with LR. This issue is not any specific question type (flaw was bothering me, I've gotten 20+ straight correct on my last PTs). My issue is that I get the majority of my wrong between 15-21. I get 4-6 wrong in a section typically, and at least 3 of them are between 15-21. This is getting increasingly annoying, to the point where it's in the back of my mind while I drill or PT. I've been going through the books (MH, Powerscore, Trainer) to brush up on my technique and drilling LR daily, it's just not clicking. I feel like I'm running out of time for "break" as well. Ugh.

I went from question first, to stem first the last few weeks, saw improvement early, then regressed back to the mean. Might switch back to question first to see if it changes something.

The other thing I might try is doing 1-15, then doing 21-25/26 then return to do 16-20.

Any one have any advice for this? This is my biggest problem and holding me back from my goal score.

For what it's worth, I'm a question stem first kinda guy, always. In response to your difficulties in the 15-20 range, try hitting 20-26 first and see if it helps. LR is tough, but you can still make gains. However, improvement is going to come from review. Don't just review the question, review your reasoning. Why did you pick that AC? Did you miss a key word? Did you feel rushed? Did you not read an AC as thoroughly as you could have? I have confidence that you know how to reason through the question, but you need to figure out what goes on in your brain when you pick the wrong AC. I started doing a *little* better when I stopped 2nd guessing myself so much.

Thank you for the advice! That portion of review makes sense, and I will try to delve deeper into my thought process of why I picked the wrong A/C and didn't pick the correct one. I'm feeling somewhat discouraged because I'm drilling, reviewing, and going through all the material, I just haven't had that ah-ah! moment yet. Good news is that I don't need to peak tomorrow, I still have a bit of time. I'd rather not postpone, but I will see how my next PT or two go, I'll try to get 2 in before the deadline Tuesday.

[zkyggi]

I have been hermitted in my LSAT bunker. I have improved my RC and LG to my goal scores. I have been having a difficult time with LR. This issue is not any specific question type (flaw was bothering me, I've gotten 20+ straight correct on my last PTs). My issue is that I get the majority of my wrong between 15-21. I get 4-6 wrong in a section typically, and at least 3 of them are between 15-21. This is getting increasingly annoying, to the point where it's in the back of my mind while I drill or PT. I've been going through the books (MH, Powerscore, Trainer) to brush up on my technique and drilling LR daily, it's just not clicking. I feel like I'm running out of time for "break" as well. Ugh.

I went from question first, to stem first the last few weeks, saw improvement early, then regressed back to the mean. Might switch back to question first to see if it changes something.

The other thing I might try is doing 1-15, then doing 21-25/26 then return to do 16-20.

Any one have any advice for this? This is my biggest problem and holding me back from my goal score.

For what it's worth, I'm a question stem first kinda guy, always. In response to your difficulties in the 15-20 range, try hitting 20-26 first and see if it helps. LR is tough, but you can still make gains. However, improvement is going to come from review. Don't just review the question, review your reasoning. Why did you pick that AC? Did you miss a key word? Did you feel rushed? Did you not read an AC as thoroughly as you could have? I have confidence that you know how to reason through the question, but you need to figure out what goes on in your brain when you pick the wrong AC. I started doing a *little* better when I stopped 2nd guessing myself so much.

I just has a big LR breakthrough. Up until about two weeks ago, LR was consistently -4 or more on each section. Now, I am consistently under -6 on LR, usually under -5 combined. While not perfect, it has pushed me into 170+ average. I echo the sentiments on review. I think that with review, LR is perhaps the easiest section to make improvements, especially if you have read the bibles/trainer. You should be checking out every single question that gives you pause either in your prephrase or your answer choice.

I miss questions most often in the same range as well (17 is my most often missed LR q across 23 PTs). When I switched to question first, my accuracy improved. You really need to make sure you aren't missing any easy questions, because harder questions usually just require a bit more time. You should ideally be able to efficiently deal with all of the easy questions so that you have time to do questions that give you trouble without getting flustered.

If you are getting -4/-6 wrong, it may not be a question type, but it is a concept that is hanging you up, be it a LR concept generally or a LSAT-specific LR quirk like language, structure, or time.

While useful at the margins, I don't think that knowing where your mistakes are coming from in the section is particularly helpful except for dialing in test-day specifics. I venture to say that most people that have trouble with LR will have most of their mistakes on q's 15+.

[saf18hornet]

I know the general consensus is that the newer PT's are easier, but wow the difference b/w the PT's in the 30's and the PT's is the 60's is noticeable for me. I've been alternating 32-62-33-63-34 etc....... and I score 2-3 points better on the newer ones. So i'm not sure what that says about my level of understanding, but I found that interesting.

On a side note, if you haven't done the LG's in the mid 30's exams, do them! Wayyyy harder

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

My hockey teams getting eliminated tonight so that'll really help with my sleep schedule

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

I worked my way through PT b and did the games from C. Wow I really recommend checking them out especially for the LR and games

[Mikey]

is there anyone here who actually follows 7sage and solves all game boards up front for LG? I used to do this when I started but found that if I created too many unnecessary boards I would just waste a ton of time. Do any of you actually do this??

I found that making quick inferences with the rules up front and then going into the questions and making boards for the IF questions, then going to the MBT/CBT questions last helped with timing and accuracy.

What is the method you guys use?

[Future Ex-Engineer]

is there anyone here who actually follows 7sage and solves all game boards up front for LG? I used to do this when I started but found that if I created too many unnecessary boards I would just waste a ton of time. Do any of you actually do this??

I found that making quick inferences with the rules up front and then going into the questions and making boards for the IF questions, then going to the MBT/CBT questions last helped with timing and accuracy.

What is the method you guys use?

DISCLAIMER: Would not advise my method, since it works for me, but I'm an engineer and have been formally trained to think differently than most people taking the LSAT.

My method is immediately write out all variables/modifiers (so ABCDEF are the placements, XY are the modifiers) and then try to sketch out a brief overview of the placement scheme. For assignment, that means drawing the number of blanks and numbering them. For days w/ AM/PM stack two lines of blanks etc. For In/Out, set up two sides for In/Out. Circle games, draw out the circle with possible placement blanks. Etc etc etc.
Only real note here is that if it's a weird game (think trading corporations from PT80 or the weird locations game in one of the first 10 PTs) I typically won't draw anything until I get a better idea of what is going on.

Then, I draw out all the rules. From there, I fill in the base board with the definitive rules, and try to link any conditionals. Then I attack the first question, and while I'm working on it and the second, my brain is processing secondary inferences in the background. I think this wouldn't work for many others simply because most wouldn't be able to simultaneously be figuring out secondary inferences while solving Q's, but I've only missed 1 LG question in the past 5 months, and typically finish a section with 7 minutes left.

I credit my engineering background for my quick ability to solve games.

[tuna_wasabi]

Late check in, but I've been prepping since the beginning of Feb and started with an initial diagnostic of 153.

Just did PT 68 5 sections yesterday going LR1: -1 (BR -1) LR2: -2 (BR -1) LG: -5 (BR -0) and RC: -8 (BR -4) (AHHHH!!!) Standardized score of 167.

I'm finally starting to get almost there in LG (ran out of time on the last one and went -4 and missed another one on a stupid mistake on G3) but these gains I've seen recently have been offset in a downtrend in RC, seems like for every point I pick up in LG I lose one in RC. PT 67 was also kind of rough for RC, as I went -5 and these last two tests are down from a consistent range of missing 1-3. Not a fan of excuses, but I had a really rough Colitis flare up the night before, and it took me a while to really get in the grove for S1, which was the RC that I flopped on.

Also, I think I mistakenly thought I was "good" on RC a few weeks ago and really cut back my work in that section. Won't be making that mistake again!

I know I'm capable of doing well in all sections, I just can't seem to do well in all 4 in the same PT. Current plan is to continue to drill LG like crazy while adding in RC sections + blind review. I'm very close to a true LG breakthrough and if I can just get back to where I was on RC, I should be in the score range that I'm aiming for.

RC on the more recent tests appears to be objectively harder than older tests. When I started I was -2 consistently on RC, but when I started the more recent tests I stayed above -4 for ages. They demand a deeper understanding of the passage than earlier tests because the ACs have gotten harder. I have to line-check almost every question now whereas before there was usually a standout correct answer. Are you reading for structure now?

My RC is all over the place with the most recent PT's. How do you guys overcome this?

[Mikey]

DISCLAIMER: Would not advise my method, since it works for me, but I'm an engineer and have been formally trained to think differently than most people taking the LSAT.

My method is immediately write out all variables/modifiers (so ABCDEF are the placements, XY are the modifiers) and then try to sketch out a brief overview of the placement scheme. For assignment, that means drawing the number of blanks and numbering them. For days w/ AM/PM stack two lines of blanks etc. For In/Out, set up two sides for In/Out. Circle games, draw out the circle with possible placement blanks. Etc etc etc.
Only real note here is that if it's a weird game (think trading corporations from PT80 or the weird locations game in one of the first 10 PTs) I typically won't draw anything until I get a better idea of what is going on.

Then, I draw out all the rules. From there, I fill in the base board with the definitive rules, and try to link any conditionals. Then I attack the first question, and while I'm working on it and the second, my brain is processing secondary inferences in the background. I think this wouldn't work for many others simply because most wouldn't be able to simultaneously be figuring out secondary inferences while solving Q's, but I've only missed 1 LG question in the past 5 months, and typically finish a section with 7 minutes left.

I credit my engineering background for my quick ability to solve games.

Nice. Sounds like the usual LG process imo though, but probably not the whole secondary inferences thing. I've never really done the whole secondary inferences thing unless I was skipping around questions and made an inference for something else, if that makes sense. But routinely doing it, definitely haven't.

[tuna_wasabi]

What do you guys think about PT's 42-51 compared to the more recent PT's in terms of difficulty? What do I miss if I do not go through PT's 42-51 at all?

I'm planning to do 10-11 PT's till test day, and my review takes hours (for regular LR and RC, around 3 hours per section). With this in mind, should I just:
(1) Do the more recent PT's and re-review all the ones I have done, i.e. go through all the challenging LR questions and redoing all the LG's.
(2) Not re-review the ones I have done, and use PT's 42-51 for section drills?

[NavyNuke]

.

[Saylor1720]

I have been hermitted in my LSAT bunker. I have improved my RC and LG to my goal scores. I have been having a difficult time with LR. This issue is not any specific question type (flaw was bothering me, I've gotten 20+ straight correct on my last PTs). My issue is that I get the majority of my wrong between 15-21. I get 4-6 wrong in a section typically, and at least 3 of them are between 15-21. This is getting increasingly annoying, to the point where it's in the back of my mind while I drill or PT. I've been going through the books (MH, Powerscore, Trainer) to brush up on my technique and drilling LR daily, it's just not clicking. I feel like I'm running out of time for "break" as well. Ugh.

I went from question first, to stem first the last few weeks, saw improvement early, then regressed back to the mean. Might switch back to question first to see if it changes something.

The other thing I might try is doing 1-15, then doing 21-25/26 then return to do 16-20.

Any one have any advice for this? This is my biggest problem and holding me back from my goal score.

For what it's worth, I'm a question stem first kinda guy, always. In response to your difficulties in the 15-20 range, try hitting 20-26 first and see if it helps. LR is tough, but you can still make gains. However, improvement is going to come from review. Don't just review the question, review your reasoning. Why did you pick that AC? Did you miss a key word? Did you feel rushed? Did you not read an AC as thoroughly as you could have? I have confidence that you know how to reason through the question, but you need to figure out what goes on in your brain when you pick the wrong AC. I started doing a *little* better when I stopped 2nd guessing myself so much.

I just has a big LR breakthrough. Up until about two weeks ago, LR was consistently -4 or more on each section. Now, I am consistently under -6 on LR, usually under -5 combined. While not perfect, it has pushed me into 170+ average. I echo the sentiments on review. I think that with review, LR is perhaps the easiest section to make improvements, especially if you have read the bibles/trainer. You should be checking out every single question that gives you pause either in your prephrase or your answer choice.

I miss questions most often in the same range as well (17 is my most often missed LR q across 23 PTs). When I switched to question first, my accuracy improved. You really need to make sure you aren't missing any easy questions, because harder questions usually just require a bit more time. You should ideally be able to efficiently deal with all of the easy questions so that you have time to do questions that give you trouble without getting flustered.

If you are getting -4/-6 wrong, it may not be a question type, but it is a concept that is hanging you up, be it a LR concept generally or a LSAT-specific LR quirk like language, structure, or time.

While useful at the margins, I don't think that knowing where your mistakes are coming from in the section is particularly helpful except for dialing in test-day specifics. I venture to say that most people that have trouble with LR will have most of their mistakes on q's 15+.

Thank you for the post. I will continue my review process but pay some extra attention to how I came to the wrong a/c, why I didn't pick the correct one, etc. Along with hashing out the reasoning of the argument. I think one of the things that has been frustrating is that I haven't been able to figure out why I'm missing the ones I do. They seem random but most likely are not. I just need to find out what's holding me back.

[MediocreAtBest]

Took a solid 3 days off of anything LSAT-related. Time to get after it now and make that push to 175!

[zkyggi]

My RC is all over the place with the most recent PT's. How do you guys overcome this?

I read for structure and take as much time as I need to understand the passage. When I start an RC section, I have begun to pick the passages with the most questions instead of going straight through. If you spend the time up front to really understand the passage (which means rereading what you don't understand enough to keep the thread of the argument) then it is much easier to line-check ACs when you get stuck. The difficulty of the recent RC is really all about the ACs, but the nature of the questions is the same such that if you know where to look, you will almost always find the answer. I broke through my -4 barrier by doing this. In my past 7 RC sections (drills + PTs) I haven't gone more than -2. This change took about 3 days to grasp before it paid off.