JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[lsatkid007]

PT 43 -

87 Raw
168 Scaled

RC -10 - I dropped the entire Bilingual Puerto Rican Family Passage, I felt like an idiot after I thought the section went well. I've been drilling the shit out of RC so its frustrating to see a huge step back like this.

LR1 -2 - Finished at the buzzer. I missed the parallel reasoning question that I was rushing through to finish and an earlier question that I misread

LR2 -2 - I finished with a couple minutes, I had two misreads

LG -0 - I finished several minutes before the five minute mark.

I really hope I can get this RC thing under control before June, otherwise I'm screwed.

Was it your first time doing these games?

[052220151]

PT 43 -

87 Raw
168 Scaled

RC -10 - I dropped the entire Bilingual Puerto Rican Family Passage, I felt like an idiot after I thought the section went well. I've been drilling the shit out of RC so its frustrating to see a huge step back like this.

LR1 -2 - Finished at the buzzer. I missed the parallel reasoning question that I was rushing through to finish and an earlier question that I misread

LR2 -2 - I finished with a couple minutes, I had two misreads

LG -0 - I finished several minutes before the five minute mark.

I really hope I can get this RC thing under control before June, otherwise I'm screwed.

Was it your first time doing these games?

I think so. I may have done one before, I don't remember. They seemed fresh.

ETA- I don't have any of the bundles that use problems from tests newer than 38, and I've never taken this PT before. So they were fresh.

[RhymesLikeDimes]

That Bilingual Puerto Rican Family passage was nasty, don't feel too bad. God, the things I would do to have an easy RC section on the June LSAT.

[wtrc]

That Bilingual Puerto Rican Family passage was nasty, don't feel too bad. God, the things I would do to have an easy RC section on the June LSAT.

My one actual LSAT administration (June 2011), I had RC experimental first. I was so confident and happy... I thought I had aced it and it was the easiest ever- I even finished with time left over!

Alas, section 5 was a killer.

[CardozoLaw09]

Ahhh finished LG section of 64 at the buzzer — not good.

[A.Taarabt7]

someone answer my Question ( posted it before but everyone ignored it )

should I just print out all the pdfs of pt I own from 1-30 and just drill the assigned LR questions by type that way?( even if its 2 problems out of the entire 2 LR sections) or should I just read it off the CPU screen?

also in the LSAT Blog study guide he says to do time sections of LG
so when I repeat these sections the next day or within 3 days time, do I do them timed again or untimed?

thanks

[arcanecircle]

someone answer my Question ( posted it before but everyone ignored it )

should I just print out all the pdfs of pt I own from 1-30 and just drill the assigned LR questions by type that way?( even if its 2 problems out of the entire 2 LR sections) or should I just read it off the CPU screen?

also in the LSAT Blog study guide he says to do time sections of LG
so when I repeat these sections the next day or within 3 days time, do I do them timed again or untimed?

thanks

I wouldn't do them off screen, since the test isn't going to be on a computer screen. I also like to highlight/cross out ACs during my elimination. I imagine if you're flexible enough, or you don't need to write down anything when answering problems, this method might work for you.

People pay the extra cost of the Cambridge bundles so they don't have to sift through individual PTs to drill only 1 type of problem. If you're strapped for cash and don't want to buy the bundles, I'd recommend using Adobe Extended edition to chop up your PT problems and make a new PDF of problems by type. This would take a considerable amount of time though, and the opportunity cost alone (time spent where you could just be studying) makes the Cambridge LR packets worth the cost, in my opinion.

As for LG, I've never done them untimed, first, second, third retries are usually an attempt to break an earlier record, whether its in time or accuracy, so it would make sense to time them every time.

[bdeans91]

Hey guys so I did PithyPike's plan for the most part, and I've learned almost all of the material.

Here's the deal... I plan on taking April, May, and June and just going crazy - basically PT-review-review 3 day cycles every single day.

So I would get PT 45-68 done by the time it is all said and done. And do them as 5 sections.

And I'm not too worried about how hard it will be - it is actually going to take less time per day than I'm doing now learning the material and doing a brutal neurobiology course!

My question is just whether you guys think that is a solid # of PTs to take and if I'm picking the right PTs to be taking.

I'm PTing around 167-169 right now (I've only done my diagnostic 157, Super Prep A 169, Super Prep B 167) and I'm in Canada so if I get a 170 I am in at every school with money - I don't need a 175+ so I'm not trading my life away for that lol.

Thanks guys.

[arcanecircle]

Ahhh finished LG section of 64 at the buzzer — not good.

Is that really a problem, Dozo? I think the amount you get wrong is more important than how much time you had to spare, so long as you weren't rushing, I guess.

[arcanecircle]

That Bilingual Puerto Rican Family passage was nasty, don't feel too bad. God, the things I would do to have an easy RC section on the June LSAT.

-3'd that passage...god.

Just -4'd the Native American powwow passage on PT25...god...I hate RC sometimes.

[CardozoLaw09]

Ahhh finished LG section of 64 at the buzzer — not good.

Is that really a problem, Dozo? I think the amount you get wrong is more important than how much time you had to spare, so long as you weren't rushing, I guess.

It's just cutting it way too close with respect to time; I like to have at least 5 minutes to spare just to check over answers I wasn't 100% about. Also, I don't usually finish LG at the buzzer so I was kind of surprised - the third game was pretty tough, or I don't think my diagram was as effective as it could have been. Ended up getting 3 wrong overall which is bad enough :/

[wtrc]

Ahhh finished LG section of 64 at the buzzer — not good.

Is that really a problem, Dozo? I think the amount you get wrong is more important than how much time you had to spare, so long as you weren't rushing, I guess.

It's just cutting it way too close with respect to time; I like to have at least 5 minutes to spare just to check over answers I wasn't 100% about. Also, I don't usually finish LG at the buzzer so I was kind of surprised - the third game was pretty tough, or I don't think my diagram was as effective as it could have been. Ended up getting 3 wrong overall which is bad enough :/

Agreed. My LSAT nightmare is finishing time with a full game left to do (would have happened to me if mauve dinosaur game was on my LSAT). Dozo, did you go into this tired or having already done a lot of practicing today? Sometimes my timing is way off if I'm burnt out.

[CardozoLaw09]

^ Nope wasn't tired from practicing or burnt out. It was just one of those sections, I guess. Misread one of the rules in the last game so that had something to do with it as well.

[A.Taarabt7]

someone answer my Question ( posted it before but everyone ignored it )

should I just print out all the pdfs of pt I own from 1-30 and just drill the assigned LR questions by type that way?( even if its 2 problems out of the entire 2 LR sections) or should I just read it off the CPU screen?

also in the LSAT Blog study guide he says to do time sections of LG
so when I repeat these sections the next day or within 3 days time, do I do them timed again or untimed?

thanks

I wouldn't do them off screen, since the test isn't going to be on a computer screen. I also like to highlight/cross out ACs during my elimination. I imagine if you're flexible enough, or you don't need to write down anything when answering problems, this method might work for you.

People pay the extra cost of the Cambridge bundles so they don't have to sift through individual PTs to drill only 1 type of problem. If you're strapped for cash and don't want to buy the bundles, I'd recommend using Adobe Extended edition to chop up your PT problems and make a new PDF of problems by type. This would take a considerable amount of time though, and the opportunity cost alone (time spent where you could just be studying) makes the Cambridge LR packets worth the cost, in my opinion.

As for LG, I've never done them untimed, first, second, third retries are usually an attempt to break an earlier record, whether its in time or accuracy, so it would make sense to time them every time.

ok thanks for answering my question

sent you a pm with more info
I will buy both volumes of Cambridge LR to drill
and then when I repeat the question will probably just print out the page or maybe just photocopy all the pages of the books so I can redo all the problems once again.

wish cardozo would of answered or the guy with the avi eating the hot dog rather than ignoring

[052220151]

someone answer my Question ( posted it before but everyone ignored it )

should I just print out all the pdfs of pt I own from 1-30 and just drill the assigned LR questions by type that way?( even if its 2 problems out of the entire 2 LR sections) or should I just read it off the CPU screen?

also in the LSAT Blog study guide he says to do time sections of LG
so when I repeat these sections the next day or within 3 days time, do I do them timed again or untimed?

thanks

I wouldn't do them off screen, since the test isn't going to be on a computer screen. I also like to highlight/cross out ACs during my elimination. I imagine if you're flexible enough, or you don't need to write down anything when answering problems, this method might work for you.

People pay the extra cost of the Cambridge bundles so they don't have to sift through individual PTs to drill only 1 type of problem. If you're strapped for cash and don't want to buy the bundles, I'd recommend using Adobe Extended edition to chop up your PT problems and make a new PDF of problems by type. This would take a considerable amount of time though, and the opportunity cost alone (time spent where you could just be studying) makes the Cambridge LR packets worth the cost, in my opinion.

As for LG, I've never done them untimed, first, second, third retries are usually an attempt to break an earlier record, whether its in time or accuracy, so it would make sense to time them every time.

ok thanks for answering my question

sent you a pm with more info
I will buy both volumes of Cambridge LR to drill
and then when I repeat the question will probably just print out the page or maybe just photocopy all the pages of the books so I can redo all the problems once again.

wish cardozo would of answered or the guy with the avi eating the hot dog rather than ignoring

Sorry big guy, I work a 9-5, so I'm just getting off now. You should definitely print them. It gets you used to the real thing, plus it's nice to be able to scribble if you need to.

[wtrc]

Tough NA question. Honestly thought the correct answer was a mistake until I looked a bit more. PT 5, S1, Q3. I understand it now, but something I don't see often anymore.

[CardozoLaw09]

someone answer my Question ( posted it before but everyone ignored it )

should I just print out all the pdfs of pt I own from 1-30 and just drill the assigned LR questions by type that way?( even if its 2 problems out of the entire 2 LR sections) or should I just read it off the CPU screen?

also in the LSAT Blog study guide he says to do time sections of LG
so when I repeat these sections the next day or within 3 days time, do I do them timed again or untimed?

thanks

I wouldn't do them off screen, since the test isn't going to be on a computer screen. I also like to highlight/cross out ACs during my elimination. I imagine if you're flexible enough, or you don't need to write down anything when answering problems, this method might work for you.

People pay the extra cost of the Cambridge bundles so they don't have to sift through individual PTs to drill only 1 type of problem. If you're strapped for cash and don't want to buy the bundles, I'd recommend using Adobe Extended edition to chop up your PT problems and make a new PDF of problems by type. This would take a considerable amount of time though, and the opportunity cost alone (time spent where you could just be studying) makes the Cambridge LR packets worth the cost, in my opinion.

As for LG, I've never done them untimed, first, second, third retries are usually an attempt to break an earlier record, whether its in time or accuracy, so it would make sense to time them every time.

ok thanks for answering my question

sent you a pm with more info
I will buy both volumes of Cambridge LR to drill
and then when I repeat the question will probably just print out the page or maybe just photocopy all the pages of the books so I can redo all the problems once again.

wish cardozo would of answered or the guy with the avi eating the hot dog rather than ignoring

My bad. I didn't answer cause it was one of those "what works best for you" type of things and I thought someone would be able to provide a more thorough answer. I don't print them cause it's way too much ink/paper and I'm already tight on that. I just drill by looking at the PDFs on computer.

[RhymesLikeDimes]

PT 53:

LR1: -2 (#8 and 12)
LG: -0 (lmao at this section; finished in 19 minutes, what a joke)
LR2: -0
RC: -3 (#6, 11, 14)

Raw: 95 --> Scaled: 176

Felt really good through the first three sections. The first two RC passages were tough, but I sneaked in under 35 min. I'll take it, I'll take it.

[NoWorries]

Is it valuable to just keep doing the same games over and over? I've pretty much run out of unused games to drill at the moment.

[mvonh001]

how long did it take you (anyone here) to get past the 165-167 range? How long did it take you to get to that range?

[wtrc]

Is it valuable to just keep doing the same games over and over? I've pretty much run out of unused games to drill at the moment.

Unless you have some insane photographic memory, I think it is valuable. Hard to remember all the inferences, and either way- games for the most part are just repeats with different variables and conditions- work on timing and getting the setup and inferences perfect.

[A.Taarabt7]

hmm damn went better than expected

sorry if I sounded uptight . I don't really have too many other partners to study with at this time. I will be getting some soon. I just post my important questions ITT because its very active.

Thanks for the responses I appreciate it a lot

[052220151]

hmm damn went better than expected

sorry if I sounded uptight . I don't really have too many other partners to study with at this time. I will be getting some soon. I just post my important questions ITT because its very active.

Thanks for the responses I appreciate it a lot

No worries man. We are all in this together. Please post your two cents when you feel it's relevant.

[ZGr88n]

how long did it take you (anyone here) to get past the 165-167 range? How long did it take you to get to that range?

151 in Jan.
166 in Mid-March

So it took me roughly two months. However, I could have probably did it in less time, but I just wasn't putting enough time into it like I should have been. As for your other question, I don't know because I haven't cracked into the +168 range yet. I would be interested in hearing other people's experiences on how long it took them to go from 165-167 to +168.

[rebexness]

Is it valuable to just keep doing the same games over and over? I've pretty much run out of unused games to drill at the moment.

Unless you have some insane photographic memory, I think it is valuable. Hard to remember all the inferences, and either way- games for the most part are just repeats with different variables and conditions- work on timing and getting the setup and inferences perfect.

Agree. I never remember anything about games. (But I do remember LR passages, ugh).

You should go through the games as many times as you can. I think PP recommends 3x each, which is what I am going to shoot for.