OutedBillPackets wrote:GreenTee wrote:What is a fat lipper?
The Official September 2014 Study Group Forum
- Colonel_funkadunk
- Posts: 3248
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
-
- Posts: 3843
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 11:33 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Last edited by Hand on Wed Dec 17, 2014 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1364
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 3:15 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
.
Last edited by GreenTee on Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- BillPackets
- Posts: 2176
- Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
i wish that was meColonel_funkadunk wrote:OutedBillPackets wrote:GreenTee wrote:What is a fat lipper?
Edit:
GreenTee wrote:Is it PW time already?
its always PW time
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Toby Ziegler
- Posts: 701
- Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 2:59 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Did PT 9 today.
RC -7 (I really need to study/drill RC)
LR1 -11 (not sure what in the actual fuuuu happened here...)
LG -2
LR2 -6
163
Pretty disappointed with this LR performance. Going to drill the problem area questions. I also need to get faster at LG, spent way too much time on the first and second game.
RC -7 (I really need to study/drill RC)
LR1 -11 (not sure what in the actual fuuuu happened here...)
LG -2
LR2 -6
163
Pretty disappointed with this LR performance. Going to drill the problem area questions. I also need to get faster at LG, spent way too much time on the first and second game.
- BillPackets
- Posts: 2176
- Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
What kinds of LR Qs did u miss? Also the old tests are pretty similar to current tests, but they're weirdly different.Toby Ziegler wrote:Did PT 9 today.
RC -7 (I really need to study/drill RC)
LR1 -11 (not sure what in the actual fuuuu happened here...)
LG -2
LR2 -6
163
Pretty disappointed with this LR performance. Going to drill the problem area questions. I also need to get faster at LG, spent way too much time on the first and second game.
- Colonel_funkadunk
- Posts: 3248
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
This x1000BillPackets wrote:Colonel_funkadunk wrote:BillPackets wrote:
its always PW time
Edit: I'm an idiot when it comes to quoting
- Colonel_funkadunk
- Posts: 3248
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
To add: was it more of a timing issue or an issue w the questions?BillPackets wrote:What kinds of LR Qs did u miss? Also the old tests are pretty similar to current tests, but they're weirdly different.Toby Ziegler wrote:Did PT 9 today.
RC -7 (I really need to study/drill RC)
LR1 -11 (not sure what in the actual fuuuu happened here...)
LG -2
LR2 -6
163
Pretty disappointed with this LR performance. Going to drill the problem area questions. I also need to get faster at LG, spent way too much time on the first and second game.
- hillz
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:41 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Yep. First thing I do each morning is pound coffee. I need to get back into running but it's too goddamn hot this month.hereisonehand wrote:That's what caffeine is for! But seriously, I'm so glad I got back into early morning running recently, even if it means I'm getting up at 5:30.GreenTee wrote:
Also, how do people function without exercising? If I don't do something active in the morning, for the rest of the day I feel like I'm swimming through an ocean of maple syrup.
-
- Posts: 4102
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Guys I must reveal my true intentions for attending UT is simply the abundance of 24 hr fitness centers
-
- Posts: 4102
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Another confession. I still have no clue what anyone is talking about when it comes to suff/necc assumption. I mean, I get pretty decent scores. I just dont think about it. I just fuckin answer it haha. I dont say "oh shit that's sufficient but not necessary" or anything. I literally just answer it. Perhaps I'd get one maybe two more ?'s right if I did (I dont even think I miss any of them) but my point is that I truly, truly believe that people think those out too much. Just answer it haha.
- Colonel_funkadunk
- Posts: 3248
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Are we making the transformation to confession hour in the sept thread? I'm down
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 4102
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
People pay attention to the question stem wayyyy too much. I mean, its important, but like there are literally only 4 diff ways to attack questions. They all fall under the same categories. People just sorta freak out when they see assump ?'s
-
- Posts: 1364
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 3:15 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
.
Last edited by GreenTee on Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Colonel_funkadunk
- Posts: 3248
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Confession: this is the understatement of the week.smccgrey wrote:And my PT avg is pretty dece.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- Colonel_funkadunk
- Posts: 3248
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
I agree, I've seen some necessary questions where some of the wrong answer choices were sufficient but not necessaryGreenTee wrote:How do you "just answer it" without having a clear understanding of what the question is asking?ilikebaseball wrote:Another confession. I still have no clue what anyone is talking about when it comes to suff/necc assumption. I mean, I get pretty decent scores. I just dont think about it. I just fuckin answer it haha. I dont say "oh shit that's sufficient but not necessary" or anything. I literally just answer it. Perhaps I'd get one maybe two more ?'s right if I did (I dont even think I miss any of them) but my point is that I truly, truly believe that people think those out too much. Just answer it haha.
I mean, I guess you can POE your way through the easy questions without knowing the difference between a necessary and sufficient assumption, but it won't work on all of them. I approach these questions very differently, because they really are very different tasks.
-
- Posts: 4102
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
That's the thing. I do understand what its asking. However, I dont say to myself "oh that answer choice is sufficient, but not necessary." If you have to do that, youre thinking about it too hard. The LSAT should be something you take after acquiring a good question attacking habit. So, whenever I see an assumption I just answer it how its asked. I dont do the negation strategies or anything that the books try to teach.GreenTee wrote:How do you "just answer it" without having a clear understanding of what the question is asking?ilikebaseball wrote:Another confession. I still have no clue what anyone is talking about when it comes to suff/necc assumption. I mean, I get pretty decent scores. I just dont think about it. I just fuckin answer it haha. I dont say "oh shit that's sufficient but not necessary" or anything. I literally just answer it. Perhaps I'd get one maybe two more ?'s right if I did (I dont even think I miss any of them) but my point is that I truly, truly believe that people think those out too much. Just answer it haha.
I mean, I guess you can POE your way through the easy questions without knowing the difference between a necessary and sufficient assumption, but it won't work on all of them. I approach these questions very differently, because they really are very different tasks.
All I'm saying is that people think WAY too hard about some questions and need a more simpler approach. Not just for assump, but for everything.
- Colonel_funkadunk
- Posts: 3248
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Okay both of your guys responses make a lot more sense now.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- BillPackets
- Posts: 2176
- Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
I do agree w your argument when it comes to games. I did all the games from the Cambridge packet and can't tell you the difference between determined assignment/undetermined assignment, but I'm pretty good at games nonetheless.
Edit: spoke too soon. Gotcha
-
- Posts: 4102
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Quick question on PT 23 S2 #26.
Its the one about restrictions on teenage drivers. I picked A. It's a weakenX question. How does the fact that teenagers drive an older car weaken the fact that teenagers lack basic driving skills? Just because a car is less stable doesnt make it any less of a car.
Its the one about restrictions on teenage drivers. I picked A. It's a weakenX question. How does the fact that teenagers drive an older car weaken the fact that teenagers lack basic driving skills? Just because a car is less stable doesnt make it any less of a car.
- flash21
- Posts: 1536
- Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
I don't have the question in front of me, but I think I remember why.ilikebaseball wrote:Quick question on PT 23 S2 #26.
Its the one about restrictions on teenage drivers. I picked A. It's a weakenX question. How does the fact that teenagers drive an older car weaken the fact that teenagers lack basic driving skills? Just because a car is less stable doesnt make it any less of a car.
It actually acts as an alternative reason for them being in more accidents (or fatal accidents, I forget). It is an alternative because perhaps instead of them lacking basic driving skills, they simply drive shittier cars which are therefore more dangerous, giving the illusion that they lack driving skills, when they don't, they just lack money to get a decent vehicle.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login