The Official February 2016 Waiter's Thread Forum

[lsat_hellhole]

Hey I just realized.. do the Sabbath observers who take the LSAT on Tuesday get a different exam? Because if not, they have a serious advantage in getting info from these boards..

Oh well, just one more way the LSAT gives unfair advantages, like to whoever can fork over the most $$ for expensive prep programs... or luck of the draw in getting an easier experimental version of the test instead of getting the insanely hard RC at the very end when you're the most tired.

BTW, I can understand the LR and RC being relevant to law school, but WTF about the LG? So stupid. Just seems to just be a measure of whoever spent the most time/$$$$ on test prep.

I didn't spend any money on classes & I mastered logic games. To me, it makes sense why they're on there. It tests your ability to make important inferences without fabricating details. I can see how that ability would be important as a lawyer

LG is a Joke. It tests your ability to do nonsense under time pressure. In no way does this measure any real world law school or law practice scenario. I hear people with autism do especially well on these games. So good, at least it gives a disadvantaged group a leg up. Other than that, it's bogus.That's why the GRE got rid of these games years ago.

you just sound upset because you couldn't do well on them lol....they're the most easily-improved section of the test. And once you understand them, they become easy points. Maybe they're testing your discipline and willingness to understand something. And if you're that upset about them, maybe you need to up your studying haha

Wrong again. Is doing poorly on the LG a necessary or sufficient for thinking the LG is lame? Better check your LR skills on that..

[AbbeyS]

Hey I just realized.. do the Sabbath observers who take the LSAT on Tuesday get a different exam? Because if not, they have a serious advantage in getting info from these boards..

Oh well, just one more way the LSAT gives unfair advantages, like to whoever can fork over the most $$ for expensive prep programs... or luck of the draw in getting an easier experimental version of the test instead of getting the insanely hard RC at the very end when you're the most tired.

BTW, I can understand the LR and RC being relevant to law school, but WTF about the LG? So stupid. Just seems to just be a measure of whoever spent the most time/$$$$ on test prep.

I didn't spend any money on classes & I mastered logic games. To me, it makes sense why they're on there. It tests your ability to make important inferences without fabricating details. I can see how that ability would be important as a lawyer

LG is a Joke. It tests your ability to do nonsense under time pressure. In no way does this measure any real world law school or law practice scenario. I hear people with autism do especially well on these games. So good, at least it gives a disadvantaged group a leg up. Other than that, it's bogus.That's why the GRE got rid of these games years ago.

you just sound upset because you couldn't do well on them lol....they're the most easily-improved section of the test. And once you understand them, they become easy points. Maybe they're testing your discipline and willingness to understand something. And if you're that upset about them, maybe you need to up your studying haha

Wrong again. Is doing poorly on the LG a necessary or sufficient for thinking the LG is lame? Better check your LR skills on that..

My "LR skills" are excellent. Thank you for checking. I just don't see why anyone would be upset about easy points if they are good at LG..

[RonnyDiniro]

Y'all crack me up

[Li'l Sebastian]

*blast zone warning*

[Shib26]

LG is a Joke. It tests your ability to do nonsense under time pressure. In no way does this measure any real world law school or law practice scenario. I hear people with autism do especially well on these games. So good, at least it gives a disadvantaged group a leg up. Other than that, it's bogus.That's why the GRE got rid of these games years ago.

I think LG is actually a quite novel way to test valuable skills in a non-obvious way. As a lawyer will we really need to be experts in arranging some random object into a certain order or grouping? No. But will we need to be able to look at a given set of facts, rules, and understand how they relate to one another? Absolutely.

[RonnyDiniro]

If someone could please check on my RC skills that'd be great cause Sculptors & Sprawling has got me feeling all types of ways

[lsat_hellhole]

Hey I just realized.. do the Sabbath observers who take the LSAT on Tuesday get a different exam? Because if not, they have a serious advantage in getting info from these boards..

Oh well, just one more way the LSAT gives unfair advantages, like to whoever can fork over the most $$ for expensive prep programs... or luck of the draw in getting an easier experimental version of the test instead of getting the insanely hard RC at the very end when you're the most tired.

BTW, I can understand the LR and RC being relevant to law school, but WTF about the LG? So stupid. Just seems to just be a measure of whoever spent the most time/$$$$ on test prep.

I didn't spend any money on classes & I mastered logic games. To me, it makes sense why they're on there. It tests your ability to make important inferences without fabricating details. I can see how that ability would be important as a lawyer

LG is a Joke. It tests your ability to do nonsense under time pressure. In no way does this measure any real world law school or law practice scenario. I hear people with autism do especially well on these games. So good, at least it gives a disadvantaged group a leg up. Other than that, it's bogus.That's why the GRE got rid of these games years ago.

you just sound upset because you couldn't do well on them lol....they're the most easily-improved section of the test. And once you understand them, they become easy points. Maybe they're testing your discipline and willingness to understand something. And if you're that upset about them, maybe you need to up your studying haha

Wrong again. Is doing poorly on the LG a necessary or sufficient for thinking the LG is lame? Better check your LR skills on that..

My "LR skills" are excellent. Thank you for checking. I just don't see why anyone would be upset about easy points if they are good at LG..

Glad to hear you think your LR skills are excellent. Maybe your problem is that you just pull dumb insulting things out of your arse without knowing whom you're talking to or what you're talking about.

Just because I did well on the LG doesn't mean that I don't resent it being a pointless waste of time.

[lsat_hellhole]

Hey I just realized.. do the Sabbath observers who take the LSAT on Tuesday get a different exam? Because if not, they have a serious advantage in getting info from these boards..

Oh well, just one more way the LSAT gives unfair advantages, like to whoever can fork over the most $$ for expensive prep programs... or luck of the draw in getting an easier experimental version of the test instead of getting the insanely hard RC at the very end when you're the most tired.

BTW, I can understand the LR and RC being relevant to law school, but WTF about the LG? So stupid. Just seems to just be a measure of whoever spent the most time/$$$$ on test prep.

I didn't spend any money on classes & I mastered logic games. To me, it makes sense why they're on there. It tests your ability to make important inferences without fabricating details. I can see how that ability would be important as a lawyer

LG is a Joke. It tests your ability to do nonsense under time pressure. In no way does this measure any real world law school or law practice scenario. I hear people with autism do especially well on these games. So good, at least it gives a disadvantaged group a leg up. Other than that, it's bogus.That's why the GRE got rid of these games years ago.

you just sound upset because you couldn't do well on them lol....they're the most easily-improved section of the test. And once you understand them, they become easy points. Maybe they're testing your discipline and willingness to understand something. And if you're that upset about them, maybe you need to up your studying haha

Wrong again. Is doing poorly on the LG a necessary or sufficient for thinking the LG is lame? Better check your LR skills on that..

My "LR skills" are excellent. Thank you for checking. I just don't see why anyone would be upset about easy points if they are good at LG..

Glad to hear you think your LR skills are excellent. Maybe your problem is that you just pull dumb insulting things out of your arse without knowing whom you're talking to or what your talking about.

Just because I did well on the LG doesn't mean that I don't resent it being a pointless waste of time.

[Li'l Sebastian]

The bickering needs to stop right meow.

[AbbeyS]

No one insulted anyone lol. Yeah we all think logic games are dumb in the grand scheme of things but we're not complaining up and down forums about it. Just take the easy points and move on

[RonnyDiniro]

I will complain about the writing section though...that shit seems pointless

[AbbeyS]

I will complain about the writing section though...that shit seems pointless

It does seem pointless since it's not scored but both times I tried my best on them. Schools are going to receive them regardless so if you have a chance to display your writing ability then I think you should take it. Not sure if it's ever swayed anyone from a rejection, but who knows...maybe they'll look at your writing & argument skills and see potential even if your score isn't superb. I've heard some people paying the price for not taking it seriously though (like scribbling on the page or just writing a thoughtless sentence)

[lsat_hellhole]

LG is a Joke. It tests your ability to do nonsense under time pressure. In no way does this measure any real world law school or law practice scenario. I hear people with autism do especially well on these games. So good, at least it gives a disadvantaged group a leg up. Other than that, it's bogus.That's why the GRE got rid of these games years ago.

I think LG is actually a quite novel way to test valuable skills in a non-obvious way. As a lawyer will we really need to be experts in arranging some random object into a certain order or grouping? No. But will we need to be able to look at a given set of facts, rules, and understand how they relate to one another? Absolutely.

Hmmm, I don't know about that. Could you provide a specific scenario of this? If LG is so useful, then why did the GRE get rid of it? I predict that LSAT will too eventually. I resent the fact that it is the LG section alone can make or break someone's chances of getting into a top tier school. So someone who doesn't actually have the aptitude for law school or top tier school can just spend a few months and a wad of benjamins on preparing for the LG. Forget the longer term preparation that goes into doing well on RC or LR or a high GPA. Fcuk that.

[Morcartwright]

Hey I just realized.. do the Sabbath observers who take the LSAT on Tuesday get a different exam? Because if not, they have a serious advantage in getting info from these boards..

Oh well, just one more way the LSAT gives unfair advantages, like to whoever can fork over the most $$ for expensive prep programs... or luck of the draw in getting an easier experimental version of the test instead of getting the insanely hard RC at the very end when you're the most tired.

BTW, I can understand the LR and RC being relevant to law school, but WTF about the LG? So stupid. Just seems to just be a measure of whoever spent the most time/$$$$ on test prep.

I didn't spend any money on classes & I mastered logic games. To me, it makes sense why they're on there. It tests your ability to make important inferences without fabricating details. I can see how that ability would be important as a lawyer

LG is a Joke. It tests your ability to do nonsense under time pressure. In no way does this measure any real world law school or law practice scenario. I hear people with autism do especially well on these games. So good, at least it gives a disadvantaged group a leg up. Other than that, it's bogus.That's why the GRE got rid of these games years ago.

you just sound upset because you couldn't do well on them lol....they're the most easily-improved section of the test. And once you understand them, they become easy points. Maybe they're testing your discipline and willingness to understand something. And if you're that upset about them, maybe you need to up your studying haha

Wrong again. Is doing poorly on the LG a necessary or sufficient for thinking the LG is lame? Better check your LR skills on that..

My "LR skills" are excellent. Thank you for checking. I just don't see why anyone would be upset about easy points if they are good at LG..

Glad to hear you think you're LR skills are excellent. Maybe your problem is that you just pull dumb insulting things out of your arse without knowing whom you're talking to or what you're talking about.

Just because I did well on the LG doesn't mean that I resent it being a pointless waste of time.

LOL... Logic games are far from a waste of time. They provide situations in which essential skills in any legal discipline are involved. First, you must understand rules and exactly what they say and how they apply. This is much like understanding exactly what a law says and when it applies. Next, you have chronological ordering of events which is an essential skill in a number of cases where you must arrange evidence that isn't necessarily automatically put in order for you. Grouping things together also can be applied to a number of cases. One of the most important things is your ability to connect things, in other words to make inferences. Many things you do in law school and out will involve making inferences from information you are given in order to rightly deduct conclusions from that info. While I agree the time aspect is a little bit more intense then it would be outside LSAT, it's needed to see those who manage to work much faster than others. I would suggest you learn to enjoy features of logic games or you could have a terrible time in law school and beyond. Best regards, and wish you the best on your score.

[lsat_hellhole]

No one insulted anyone lol. Yeah we all think logic games are dumb in the grand scheme of things but we're not complaining up and down forums about it. Just take the easy points and move on

No, you're just complaining up and down forums about people who are complaining about it. So much better.

[AbbeyS]

No one insulted anyone lol. Yeah we all think logic games are dumb in the grand scheme of things but we're not complaining up and down forums about it. Just take the easy points and move on

No, you're just complaining up and down forums about people who are complaining about it. So much better.

You proposed that logic games were pointless, and I offered my perspective about why they're not pointless. Every single thing you post is negative haha...just relax.

[lsat_hellhole]

"LOL... Logic games are far from a waste of time. They provide situations in which essential skills in any legal discipline are involved. First, you must understand rules and exactly what they say and how they apply. This is much like understanding exactly what a law says and when it applies. Next, you have chronological ordering of events which is an essential skill in a number of cases where you must arrange evidence that isn't necessarily automatically put in order for you. Grouping things together also can be applied to a number of cases. One of the most important things is your ability to connect things, in other words to make inferences. Many things you do in law school and out will involve making inferences from information you are given in order to rightly deduct conclusions from that info. While I agree the time aspect is a little bit more intense then it would be outside LSAT, it's needed to see those who manage to work much faster than others. I would suggest you learn to enjoy features of logic games or you could have a terrible time in law school and beyond. Best regards, and wish you the best on your score.

LOL. So says the expert on law school and the LG section of the LSAT. So tell me, being the expert that you are on law school and obviously either an advanced student or graduate, I want to thank you for volunteering your insight to these LSAT boards when you could obviously be doing much bigger and better things with your time.

[zeglo]

.

[lsat_hellhole]

I started off very challenged by logic games (started in early October 2015). I'd get -13 or so. It was essentially, "I'm not sure how these rules matter! What do I do?"

"Am I just stupid? Why is everyone else getting it? What am I doing wrong? How do I make better inferences?"

I struggled for a few months, even with a class. I did improve to get -7 or so with the class, but to be honest, I was not fully grasping them. I just got better at guessing.

Even with proper diagramming, some games are hard. However, if you do enough, you'll notice that on most tests, two to three of the games follow a very similar formula of sequencing, grouping, etc. with the exact same questions asked. Doing them can become robotic, in a good way.

I finally got to the -1 or -2 range (a -0 every once in a while) by doing many, many games. I bought the .pdf logic games from Cambridge for I think $90, and I printed them all out, as well as blank scantrons to go with them.

Then, each day I would do just one or two games, timed, and also bubble my answers on a blank scantron column. Since I work full-time in an office during the day, I generally cannot do much during work hours other than print stuff.

I started in the PT30-ish range and just worked my way up, sometimes repeating games. By the time I was in the games from tests in the 50's, I was getting significantly better. Something just clicked, and then games became easier.

They are still hard now sometimes, but the inferences to make become second nature when you notice the questions asked tend to be very similar. There are sometimes really strange games that baffle everyone, but those are generally just one out of four games. Sequencing and grouping are consistent, and when you get good, the rules are almost memorized each time you do a game.

Another thing I noticed is write out your diagrams on the right side of the page only. It's much, much faster to reference it that way.

As for reading and logical reasoning, those are another story. I've found LR to also be trainable, but reading is just a volatile beast.

This is exactly what I'm talking about and why I think LG is a waste of time. It doesn't measure actual aptitude or genuine preparation for law school or a law career. It just measures the ability to game the test.

[wellitsover]

As for reading and logical reasoning, those are another story. I've found LR to also be trainable, but reading is just a volatile beast.

I know what you mean. I improved a lot on LG and LR. As for RC...

When I first began studying, I'd get average -1 to -4, but nothing too concerning.

But the further I got up the PT scale, the worse I started to do. My thoughts are that (1) RC did get somewhat harder (though I can't point out how the passages actually differ besides the comparative portion), (2) I stopped reading on the side (mostly nonfiction) while I studied for the LSAT, and (3) I wasn't able to adapt to the RC techniques I found online and in prep books. I can't explain what happened, but all I know is that towards the end RC was my most unpredictable and disliked section. I went from enjoying them in the beginning to just getting through them.

Now that the LSAT is over, I can just read without worrying so much about 'how' I'm reading. While I'm sure the techniques that people use for RC may be beneficial for general reading to an extent, for me they felt stressful, contrived, and didn't really help. =/

[Morcartwright]

"LOL... Logic games are far from a waste of time. They provide situations in which essential skills in any legal discipline are involved. First, you must understand rules and exactly what they say and how they apply. This is much like understanding exactly what a law says and when it applies. Next, you have chronological ordering of events which is an essential skill in a number of cases where you must arrange evidence that isn't necessarily automatically put in order for you. Grouping things together also can be applied to a number of cases. One of the most important things is your ability to connect things, in other words to make inferences. Many things you do in law school and out will involve making inferences from information you are given in order to rightly deduct conclusions from that info. While I agree the time aspect is a little bit more intense then it would be outside LSAT, it's needed to see those who manage to work much faster than others. I would suggest you learn to enjoy features of logic games or you could have a terrible time in law school and beyond. Best regards, and wish you the best on your score.

LOL. So says the expert on law school and the LG section of the LSAT. So tell me, being the expert that you are on law school and obviously either an advanced student or graduate, I want to thank you for volunteering your insight to these LSAT boards when you could obviously be doing much bigger and better things with your time.

You're welcome. It seems that some people here could use valuable insight to help them understand the circumstances behind the LSAT.
Life isn't always about bigger and better, sometimes it's about enough, and these boards are fine for me for now. You shouldn't attempt to put people down based on your predispositions to things. Thank you for voicing your opinions though, I find it helpful to understand others views.

[MiamiHeat3]

For LR, does anyone remember choosing the same letter a lot in a stretch of questions? I had the same letter for like six answers in seven questions.

Dude the same thing happened to me, but it was in the early part of one of my LR section. I was like wtf, but I thought "this is the lsat, and weird shit is bound to happen"

[lsat_hellhole]

LOL... Logic games are far from a waste of time. They provide situations in which essential skills in any legal discipline are involved. First, you must understand rules and exactly what they say and how they apply. This is much like understanding exactly what a law says and when it applies. Next, you have chronological ordering of events which is an essential skill in a number of cases where you must arrange evidence that isn't necessarily automatically put in order for you. Grouping things together also can be applied to a number of cases. One of the most important things is your ability to connect things, in other words to make inferences. Many things you do in law school and out will involve making inferences from information you are given in order to rightly deduct conclusions from that info. While I agree the time aspect is a little bit more intense then it would be outside LSAT, it's needed to see those who manage to work much faster than others. I would suggest you learn to enjoy features of logic games or you could have a terrible time in law school and beyond. Best regards, and wish you the best on your score.

If it makes you feel better to justify how well you learned to game the exam and prioritize speed and test gaming over genuinely preparing yourself for law school and a law career, then I hope you're happy. Don't deceive yourself, that's all it is. You don't have any special aptitude over anyone else just because you can work fast on the LG. Your arrogance is astonishing. But then you're no different than the other arrogant inept a**holes I've seen inexplicably get into good law schools because they simply learned how to game the LSAT. So this better explains the paradox. Anyway, congrats. Again, I hope you're happy with your LG game awesomeness. I hope you're happy in your law school spot that you think you earned-- I'm sure you will be. Have a nice day. I'm done with this board.

[shineoncrazydiamond]

.

[AllIn1212]

I'm sorry you're having a tough one, lsathellhole

In unrelated news, I had caffeine yesterday for the first time in a month. Just a can of coke zero in the afternoon. I was singing songs in bed at 2am