The Official June 2014 Study Group Forum

[Straw_Mandible]

Welcome to the party! What was your score range in Oct? What materials/methods did you use to prepare? Is RC the weak link, or are you looking to improve all around?

October 2012 166 (I believe LG -2, LR -6 total, RC -6)
October 2013 159 (LG -6, LR -13, RC -11)

I can't believe I did that bad, although I know it'd due to the fact that I haven't done a single full timed test since October 2012 (just did not have time). So RC has always been my worst section, but I need to improve all around

Sorry to hear about the drop. I strongly recommend that you try using the LSAT Trainer to address your weaknesses in LR and RC, if you have not done so already. It is really an excellent resource, especially if you are struggling with the fundamentals in those two sections. The book has a very common-sense approach to identifying flaws (LR) and understanding reasoning structure (RC), which has allowed me to make huge jumps in those areas in a very short period of time. The drills at the end of the lessons are very useful for developing appropriate and effective habits, skills, and strategies for the specific challenges which these sections present.

[10052014]

.

[cpamom]

Sorry to hear about the drop. I strongly recommend that you try using the LSAT Trainer to address your weaknesses in LR and RC, if you have not done so already. It is really an excellent resource, especially if you are struggling with the fundamentals in those two sections. The book has a very common-sense approach to identifying flaws (LR) and understanding reasoning structure (RC), which has allowed me to make huge jumps in those areas in a very short period of time. The drills at the end of the lessons are very useful for developing appropriate and effective habits, skills, and strategies for the specific challenges which these sections present.

Thanks, I'll be sure to try it. I think LSAT trainer is about the only prep company that I haven't tried

[Straw_Mandible]

Are you almost done reading it? Also, are you drilling with it?

I am about 3/4 of the way through. The book contains drills in the chapters and the study schedule assigns further drilling after each lesson. I am also folding in some Manhattan lessons and supplemental Cambridge drilling. I plan on hitting my Cambridge packets hard as soon as I finish the Trainer.

Question for you:

I'm struggling with LG, and I don't think Mike's methods (Trainer) are helping very much. The approach he uses is less about categorizing and more about addressing general issues that games present. However, very often when I try to set up a tough game, I feel like I'm shooting in the dark with an armful of weapons that I don't really know how to use.

I saw that you're using the BP book for games, and I'm thinking of getting a copy for myself. What about BP's approach do you think was most useful for you? If you have experience with other materials (e.g., PS LGB, MLSAT LG -- both of which I own), how does BP compare?

tyia, and thanks for being so intensely motivated -- it's very inspiring.

[viviana7211]

Hi guys I am new and I need some help. I want to take the June test, so I will start studying soon.. but I am a little lost. I already purchased all the study bibles, the official LSAT superprep, 10 actual official test, 10 more actual, and a few other PT. Question is, where do I start? How do I go about making a study plan? I can dedicate about 4 hours per day. Also, should I buy the 6 month study schedule/plan offer here?
Thank you!!

[10052014]

.

[JSm00v3]

Hi guys I am new and I need some help. I want to take the June test, so I will start studying soon.. but I am a little lost. I already purchased all the study bibles, the official LSAT superprep, 10 actual official test, 10 more actual, and a few other PT. Question is, where do I start? How do I go about making a study plan? I can dedicate about 4 hours per day. Also, should I buy the 6 month study schedule/plan offer here?
Thank you!!

Hi! You've come to the right place. Before we can really give you any specific LSAT advice, a little more information is needed.
1. Have you taken a diagnostic yet?
2. What score are you aiming for?
3. How much free time do you have (per day/per week)?

One thing I can recommend is ordering the LSAT trainer off Amazon. It's like forty bucks and it has prep/drills and scheduling tips. You can also PM me if you have any questions that you don't want to post on here.

[Straw_Mandible]

Thanks for that, JL! I am going to go ahead and buy the BP book.

Also, in case anyone else is interested, I found this really informative review by Daily Double in this thread:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &start=125

Here's my review, thought I'd post it so everyone knows how BP stacks up to MLG and LGB.

Just finished the book today. I have been studying for the LSAT for awhile, probably too long, and this book was a much needed breath of fresh air. First I'll outline what I feel summarizes the best parts of the book, then I'll introduce my opinion of how the BP LG book stacks up to the competition, I'll give you a hint, it does well. The mental back and forth between the student and the fictional characters was not only hilarious but also educational, because many of the suggestions from some of these characters illustrate the pitfalls that the typical student falls into during games. In addition to the characters, the most valuable part of the book was the approach to the games, I don't mean theoretical, but in terms of teaching. It's one thing to do a game and learn form your mistakes, but it's another thing entirely to be lead through them. This book does a phenominal job of simulating a classroom environment, while at the same time offering the advantages of self study.

In the interest of full disclosure, I've been through LGB and MLG twice, I took a class, and I've been through a majority of the published games. There are two issues here, first is that I've gotten very good at the games, and second that it's been awhile, at least four months, since I read Powerscore and Manhattan. Now the first issue, might not seem like much, but since prep books, like yours and the ones above, assume that the reader is either not good at games or is just beginning to get good at them, I found most of the beginning material, especially ordering games, far too easy. That being said, I did reinforce many of the concepts and drills that I have been doing, so even though they were easy, doing them probably helped in some small way. Second, this issue sort of ties back into the first, it's been awhile since I've done the books, this is mainly an issue because I'm describing the differences and similarities from memory.

Now on to the good stuff, similarities and differences. To begin with, the glaring difference between BP and Manhattan and Powerscore is the approach BP uses to teach. Whereas BP uses a step by step approach, Powerscore and Manhttan throw games at the student then show them what they should have done. In addition, Powerscore was dense to read, Manhattan did a better job of this, although BP takes the cake. It's almost as if the student is speaking to someone, and that person is as funny as Louis C.K. Very easy to read, good job. On to the specifics, all three books employ a similar approach to ordering games, BP and Manhattan use the same diagramming method for this game type, whereas Powerscore uses an overly complex system of greater than/less than (>/<) symbols to represent who must go before who. In terms of grouping games, again Powerscore lags behind here, mostly because of its unwavering reliance upon its diagramming methods. I'm going to spend a little bit more time on this, so Powerscore uses biconditionals to not only illustrate relationships but also to diagram, this becomes difficult to read when you're taking the contrapositive of a logic chain. However, I do like the method for diagramming rules. BP uses biconditionals in just that way, written next to the rules to show a relationship, then uses basic logic to diagram the rules. While diagramming logical relationships purely in the form of the given rule and the contrapositive might be an advanced technique, I think it's the best approach to use, especially for In - Out games. Manhattan makes a leap here and uses an overly complicated, and time consuming, logic tree to illustrate relationships for In - Out games, but other than that, BP and Manhattan are very similar.

So in summary, there's not a bunch of differences between the books here in terms of theory, however in terms of teaching methods, BP is far superior, in addition, BP is very straightforward. Manhattan suggests a few new methods, some of which are valuable, specifically Manhattan's Open Board Method of diagramming open grouping games, which is in my opinion better, although very similar to the way BP solves June 2004, game 4 (p372), but other than the Open Board Method, Manhattans really just congests students' heads by suggesting time consuming and unnecessary ways to solve problems.

So would I change anything about the BP book? And again, I'm not the typical student that you're probably marketing towards since I'm a little far into prep to crack another book, but if I had to make a change to the book, I'd make the games more difficult. At the end of the book, BP recommends specific problems, some of which are labeled a difficulty level of 4, some 5. I'd suggest including all of those problems labeled four or five. In addition, one thing I really liked about Manhattan's LG book was the challenge. At the beginning of every chapter was a game, the book challenged you to do the game in less than eight minutes. The rest of that chapter was devoted to similar games and at the end of the chapter, the book challenged you to do the game in less time than before, then the book would walk you through the games. I'd recommend BP upping the difficultly level a little bit and making the book more challenging in terms of material and teaching
style.

So that's it for me, I want to thank you for letting me have a copy of the book and if you would like more information on my review or on specific parts of it, please let me know. Good luck with the books, I'm sure you'll be reprinting more very quickly.

[JSm00v3]

Thanks for that, JL! I am going to go ahead and buy the BP book.

Also, in case anyone else is interested, I found this really informative review by Daily Double in this thread:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &start=125

Here's my review, thought I'd post it so everyone knows how BP stacks up to MLG and LGB.

Just finished the book today. I have been studying for the LSAT for awhile, probably too long, and this book was a much needed breath of fresh air. First I'll outline what I feel summarizes the best parts of the book, then I'll introduce my opinion of how the BP LG book stacks up to the competition, I'll give you a hint, it does well. The mental back and forth between the student and the fictional characters was not only hilarious but also educational, because many of the suggestions from some of these characters illustrate the pitfalls that the typical student falls into during games. In addition to the characters, the most valuable part of the book was the approach to the games, I don't mean theoretical, but in terms of teaching. It's one thing to do a game and learn form your mistakes, but it's another thing entirely to be lead through them. This book does a phenominal job of simulating a classroom environment, while at the same time offering the advantages of self study.

In the interest of full disclosure, I've been through LGB and MLG twice, I took a class, and I've been through a majority of the published games. There are two issues here, first is that I've gotten very good at the games, and second that it's been awhile, at least four months, since I read Powerscore and Manhattan. Now the first issue, might not seem like much, but since prep books, like yours and the ones above, assume that the reader is either not good at games or is just beginning to get good at them, I found most of the beginning material, especially ordering games, far too easy. That being said, I did reinforce many of the concepts and drills that I have been doing, so even though they were easy, doing them probably helped in some small way. Second, this issue sort of ties back into the first, it's been awhile since I've done the books, this is mainly an issue because I'm describing the differences and similarities from memory.

Now on to the good stuff, similarities and differences. To begin with, the glaring difference between BP and Manhattan and Powerscore is the approach BP uses to teach. Whereas BP uses a step by step approach, Powerscore and Manhttan throw games at the student then show them what they should have done. In addition, Powerscore was dense to read, Manhattan did a better job of this, although BP takes the cake. It's almost as if the student is speaking to someone, and that person is as funny as Louis C.K. Very easy to read, good job. On to the specifics, all three books employ a similar approach to ordering games, BP and Manhattan use the same diagramming method for this game type, whereas Powerscore uses an overly complex system of greater than/less than (>/<) symbols to represent who must go before who. In terms of grouping games, again Powerscore lags behind here, mostly because of its unwavering reliance upon its diagramming methods. I'm going to spend a little bit more time on this, so Powerscore uses biconditionals to not only illustrate relationships but also to diagram, this becomes difficult to read when you're taking the contrapositive of a logic chain. However, I do like the method for diagramming rules. BP uses biconditionals in just that way, written next to the rules to show a relationship, then uses basic logic to diagram the rules. While diagramming logical relationships purely in the form of the given rule and the contrapositive might be an advanced technique, I think it's the best approach to use, especially for In - Out games. Manhattan makes a leap here and uses an overly complicated, and time consuming, logic tree to illustrate relationships for In - Out games, but other than that, BP and Manhattan are very similar.

So in summary, there's not a bunch of differences between the books here in terms of theory, however in terms of teaching methods, BP is far superior, in addition, BP is very straightforward. Manhattan suggests a few new methods, some of which are valuable, specifically Manhattan's Open Board Method of diagramming open grouping games, which is in my opinion better, although very similar to the way BP solves June 2004, game 4 (p372), but other than the Open Board Method, Manhattans really just congests students' heads by suggesting time consuming and unnecessary ways to solve problems.

So would I change anything about the BP book? And again, I'm not the typical student that you're probably marketing towards since I'm a little far into prep to crack another book, but if I had to make a change to the book, I'd make the games more difficult. At the end of the book, BP recommends specific problems, some of which are labeled a difficulty level of 4, some 5. I'd suggest including all of those problems labeled four or five. In addition, one thing I really liked about Manhattan's LG book was the challenge. At the beginning of every chapter was a game, the book challenged you to do the game in less than eight minutes. The rest of that chapter was devoted to similar games and at the end of the chapter, the book challenged you to do the game in less time than before, then the book would walk you through the games. I'd recommend BP upping the difficultly level a little bit and making the book more challenging in terms of material and teaching
style.

So that's it for me, I want to thank you for letting me have a copy of the book and if you would like more information on my review or on specific parts of it, please let me know. Good luck with the books, I'm sure you'll be reprinting more very quickly.

This is a really helpful review! I definitely feel that BP doesn't get the credit it deserves for LG. I haven't had a chance to go through MLSAT LG yet, so this was very helpful and informative! Thanks!

[modernista]

I've started studying and it's extremely laborious and a huge time suck. I'm reading the LG Bible, making notes in the margins, and marking it up but I find that itself takes up about three hours a night. I am learning but it's a very slow-going process. Does anyone have any tips to make it go faster? Am I going about it the wrong way?

[Straw_Mandible]

I've started studying and it's extremely laborious and a huge time suck. I'm reading the LG Bible, making notes in the margins, and marking it up but I find that itself takes up about three hours a night. I am learning but it's a very slow-going process. Does anyone have any tips to make it go faster? Am I going about it the wrong way?

Well, the learning process does take a while. The only thing I'd say, though, is that you should try your best to spend at least as much time drilling as you're spending in the book. You want to make sure that you're able to apply what you're learning as you learn it. So, I'd say mark up less, practice more, and if you're stuck on something in your drills, go back and reread the corresponding section on the game type that's giving you trouble.

[10052014]

.

[Straw_Mandible]

Any updates on progress? where are you all regarding your materials?

I'm regarding my materials in a nearby university library. (Sorry, had to.)

[rebexness]

I've started studying and it's extremely laborious and a huge time suck. I'm reading the LG Bible, making notes in the margins, and marking it up but I find that itself takes up about three hours a night. I am learning but it's a very slow-going process. Does anyone have any tips to make it go faster? Am I going about it the wrong way?

IMO, going slow is NOT a bad thing at first. You want to understand how to solve these babies without any difficulty.

Do you have the drilling packets for LG to work with?

OMG I MISS STUDYING. (Self-banned until Jan 1)

[flash21]

guys games and reading comp is still giving me trouble. games bothers me because I feel like I had done so much for games, but I will be doing more. Jay lawyer seems to have this stuff down pretty good so I will be attempting to drill like crazy like he does

[polyglotgenius]

Checking in here. Lurked a bit after the LSAT, only to realize that I should have put WAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY more effort into prep.

I took the October LSAT having kinda prepared, but not really. I took three PTs (67,68,69) and got a 166, 167, 163. On test day, I received a 160, mainly because I absolutely bombed Logic Games. I have a 3.8+ GPA (ridiculous upward curve) at a state school, and I know for a fact my LORs are awesome. Originally I just wanted to go practice at a firm, and I'd still be alright with that outcome, but I really want to shoot for legal academia. So, with that being said there is no way I am applying this cycle. On the positive side, if I start studying in December I feel confident that I can get the score I need for a top 7 school. Since, I'm not going straight to law school, I am applying to MA/PhD programs in history where I will focus on American legal and cultural history. I hopefully then can apply for JD programs and also express my interest in joint JD/ PhDs (with the credentials to back it up). I also have a decent, although not large, amount of experience with public interest work. My career goals with my law degree would be, in order: legal academia, public interest (ACLU type stuff), USG work, Big Law, smaller public interest (community legal aid type stuff). Anyways, with that in mind I'm absolutely dead set on Harvard or Stanford. I know I can do it. I'm looking for an online study partner starting in December. I plan on using Manhattan (all 3), Logic Games Bible, LSAT Trainer, and Cambridge Packets.

A little about me:
My user name is a joke. I struggle terribly with languages, it is my biggest academic weakness. Also, while I am intelligent, I am not a genius. i am a History/PoliSci major, who also happens to be a beast at math. I am HUGGGEEEE geek. Friends, movies, books, etc. is how I spend my free time. Anyways, i plan on being active on this board. Good luck to all in their studying!!

[raoulduke89]

Checking in, long time lurker as well. I've started my prep Wednesday and I'm finishing up chapter 6 of the LGB. I've yet to take a diagnostic, I'm going to hold off on it until I finish the LRB. Is anybody here located in the DC, MD, VA area? I'd like an in person study partner, although online study partners would be welcome too!!

[Picassobaby]

Longtime Lurker myself, and decided to join this thread for some extra motivation and accountability. Just beginning my prep, and am currently working using the LSAT blog's 5 month plan, using the remaining months to focus on recent PTs and cleaning up my mistakes. Right now, reading thru the LGB and drilling according to question type. Nothing timed yet just practicing the methods for more fluidity.


Looking forward to contributing to this thread and giving/receiving the support we all need to achieve our individual goals! Good Luck to you all with your prep! We're in this together!

[Straw_Mandible]

Also, while I am intelligent, I am not a genius.

lol. But it's just such a difficult line to draw, wouldn't you say?

But seriously, welcome everyone! Looking forward to all of the fun we will be having over the next 7ish months.

[10052014]

.

[10052014]

.

[alexrodriguez]

jaylawyer,

I don't understand how you've been studying so laboriously for these last few months.

I'm really going to pick up the studying after thanksgiving.

[Straw_Mandible]

jaylawyer,

I don't understand how you've been studying so laboriously for these last few months.

I'm really going to pick up the studying after thanksgiving.

+1

JL is a drilling machine. It's a good thing that perceived inadequacy is such a powerful motivating factor in my life. (Study mantra: "Must...catch...up...to...jaylawyer")

[cpamom]

Thank you so much for recommending Cambridge packets! Even though I have almost all PTs I still bought it since it's so nicely organized.

I feel that I know the basics, I just did not put in enough time into practicing. I wrote out a study schedule for myself. Each week I do a drill on LG and LR and one section of RC. I'm going to Mexico next week so I'm going to take a break, other than that I continue drilling until March and then I'll start full PTs.

[10052014]

.