The Official December 2015 Study Group Forum

cheeseee · Post by **cheeseee** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 12:53 pm

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:
cheeseee wrote:
appind wrote:
cheeseee wrote:I re-read the last passage of PT 76 (negative evidence/mercury). I still don't get the connection. What's what? Can someone help?
i did this PT last week. which question are you referring to?
Thank you for responding but I get that passage after reading McJim's breakdown. But do you mind if I ask you a question on the patent passage? (passage 2)? I can't find support for # 12 and #13.

[+] Spoiler
12- lines 24-26

13- lines 53- 54

Oh because of "exception to patent infringement". I see I see. Thank you so much Mint

WorthlessDegree · Post by **WorthlessDegree** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 12:56 pm

Read some LSAT guides last night, so now I'm doing an in-depth review of my last PT. This is exhausting.

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 12:57 pm

Post removed...

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:00 pm

Post removed...

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:00 pm

Post removed...

cheeseee · Post by **cheeseee** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:02 pm

gamerish wrote:Oh my god I completely miswrote a rule on the third game. Fuck I probably got them all wrong

consecutive vs nonconsecutive?

Phoenix97 · Post by **Phoenix97** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:02 pm

Post removed...

appind · Post by **appind** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:02 pm

slizerd wrote:
appind wrote:
slizerd wrote:
WorthlessDegree wrote:For those scoring in the high 170's, how long did it take to jump from the low 170's to high?
It took a month. and during that month, I did NOTHING LSAT RELATED AT ALL. I was scoring low 170s all up until the October test (with a dip down to high 160s nearer to the actual test, ugh), then got a 170 in Oct. Didn't study at all between Oct 3 and Nov 1 - took a PT Nov 1 and got a 178. Every PT since then has been at least 176. I think I really just needed that break.
are there specific sections where you mainly improved? how were different sections in oct and are now?
i see that i improve in LG with break but not so much in other sections where it may even go down.
I'm the opposite there, my LG feels harder after a break, it's RC that improves the most. I think having a clearer head really helped with increased reading comprehension . in Oct I was going -5-7 on RC and now it's usually -2-3. LR in Oct was -3ish each section, now usually -1-2. Definitely adds up to a higher score fast!

can you say what your section breakdown were in Oct and if anything other than clearer head helped for rc? for the oct test around -3 in the second LR is not that bad, it had difficult LR imo.

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:03 pm

Post removed...

velvet-lou · Post by **velvet-lou** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:04 pm

Post removed...

velvet-lou · Post by **velvet-lou** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:05 pm

Post removed...

velvet-lou · Post by **velvet-lou** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:07 pm

Post removed...

cheeseee · Post by **cheeseee** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:08 pm

velvet-lou wrote:
cheeseee wrote:
gamerish wrote:Oh my god I completely miswrote a rule on the third game. Fuck I probably got them all wrong
consecutive vs nonconsecutive?
Now I wanna see how you did, I did the same thing in October and had to redo it but it screwed me ended up missing 4

ya i think lot of ppl misread that rule, and that's why it gave them trouble. if read correct, the game comes out nicely with only 3 subboards.

appind · Post by **appind** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:08 pm

cheeseee wrote:
appind wrote:
cheeseee wrote:I re-read the last passage of PT 76 (negative evidence/mercury). I still don't get the connection. What's what? Can someone help?
i did this PT last week. which question are you referring to?
Thank you for responding but I get that passage after reading McJim's breakdown. But do you mind if I ask you a question on the patent passage? (passage 2)? I can't find support for # 12 and #13.

[+] Spoiler: these are both supported in the last two paragraphs.

#12 is supported in the second para, where it talks about "license agreement".

the #13 is supported at the end of last para, between lines 50-55.

cheeseee · Post by **cheeseee** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:im gunna finish my write up of PT76 later today. the questions im reviewing are (at least):
RC- all of them
LR1: 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26
LG G3
LR2: 7, 10, 12, 21, 22

LMK if you wanna see it.

velvet-lou · Post by **velvet-lou** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Post removed...

velvet-lou · Post by **velvet-lou** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:11 pm

Post removed...

cheeseee · Post by **cheeseee** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:12 pm

appind wrote:
cheeseee wrote:
appind wrote:
cheeseee wrote:I re-read the last passage of PT 76 (negative evidence/mercury). I still don't get the connection. What's what? Can someone help?
i did this PT last week. which question are you referring to?
Thank you for responding but I get that passage after reading McJim's breakdown. But do you mind if I ask you a question on the patent passage? (passage 2)? I can't find support for # 12 and #13.

[+] Spoiler
these are both supported in the last two paragraphs.

#12 is supported in the second para, where it talks about "license agreement".

the #13 is supported at the end of last para, between lines 50-55.

thank you

But I don't think I'll be able to find them during a timed test...

McJimJam · Post by **McJimJam** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:13 pm

Post removed.

McJimJam · Post by **McJimJam** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:14 pm

Post removed.

cheeseee · Post by **cheeseee** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:14 pm

McJimJam wrote:
velvet-lou wrote:
cheeseee wrote:
velvet-lou wrote:
cheeseee wrote:
gamerish wrote:Oh my god I completely miswrote a rule on the third game. Fuck I probably got them all wrong
consecutive vs nonconsecutive?
Now I wanna see how you did, I did the same thing in October and had to redo it but it screwed me ended up missing 4
ya i think lot of ppl misread that rule, and that's why it gave them trouble. if read correct, the game comes out nicely with only 3 subboards.
only 3?
Shit got to do it again, I don't think i got so few down. BRB
At first glance it looks like it
ll be broken down into 4, takes another rule to show the last set up can't be possible.

exactly. got rid of the last one.

Phoenix97 · Post by **Phoenix97** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:16 pm

Post removed...

velvet-lou · Post by **velvet-lou** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:17 pm

Post removed...

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:17 pm

Post removed...

appind · Post by **appind** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:17 pm

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:im gunna finish my write up of PT76 later today. the questions im reviewing are (at least):
RC- all of them
LR1: 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26
LG G3
LR2: 7, 10, 12, 21, 22

LMK if you wanna see it.

i also find write ups useful for the pts and drills i take. did this pt last week and have to say that Oct LR1 had me for a loop. i missed -5 on that section and previously discussed a question #21 here that i think is a big shift in the way lsat is presenting parallel flaw questions. i had to change my approach for PF due to this question.