The Official September 2016 Study Group - WAKE ME UP WHEN SEPTEMBER ENDS Forum

[PhiladelphiaCollins]

Just put up a 163 on PT 65. I think this is the highest I've gotten on a completely fresh test, so feels pretty good. My breakdown ended up being

LR1: -9
LG: -6
RC: -3
LR2: -6

After how the first two sections went I was honestly thinking I'd do a lot worse, I'm usually below -3 on LG and under -5 for LR but on the other hand I'm almost always above -5 on RC so I guess the curve has a way of working it out. The games section was alright, but I know I bombed the last one by just taking 3+ minutes on one question in the third game.

Whatever, time to B.R., drill tomorrow and then another test first thing Saturday AM

[34iplaw]

Just put up a 163 on PT 65. I think this is the highest I've gotten on a completely fresh test, so feels pretty good. My breakdown ended up being

LR1: -9
LG: -6
RC: -3
LR2: -6

After how the first two sections went I was honestly thinking I'd do a lot worse, I'm usually below -3 on LG and under -5 for LR but on the other hand I'm almost always above -5 on RC so I guess the curve has a way of working it out. The games section was alright, but I know I bombed the last one by just taking 3+ minutes on one question in the third game.

Whatever, time to B.R., drill tomorrow and then another test first thing Saturday AM

Did you find one LR section harder than the other?

I assume you are referring to #15? That was kind of a nasty question. At the same time, they did reward some solid conditional logic skills with #13/#14 which didn't require any diagram.

[PhiladelphiaCollins]

Just put up a 163 on PT 65. I think this is the highest I've gotten on a completely fresh test, so feels pretty good. My breakdown ended up being

LR1: -9
LG: -6
RC: -3
LR2: -6

After how the first two sections went I was honestly thinking I'd do a lot worse, I'm usually below -3 on LG and under -5 for LR but on the other hand I'm almost always above -5 on RC so I guess the curve has a way of working it out. The games section was alright, but I know I bombed the last one by just taking 3+ minutes on one question in the third game.

Whatever, time to B.R., drill tomorrow and then another test first thing Saturday AM

Did you find one LR section harder than the other?

I assume you are referring to #15? That was kind of a nasty question. At the same time, they did reward some solid conditional logic skills with #13/#14 which didn't require any diagram.

Yeah, I scuttled HARD on the first LR section, which is weird because I usually come out on all cylinders in the first section. 2nd section I ran out of time for one question, but found it much easier.

And yeah haha. I glanced at the question after I did my experimental and figured out the answer immediately I was actually pissed that I answered it wrong, but you're right. Once you get the in/out section of the game figured out you can go through those questions pretty authoritatively.

[34iplaw]

Just put up a 163 on PT 65. I think this is the highest I've gotten on a completely fresh test, so feels pretty good. My breakdown ended up being

LR1: -9
LG: -6
RC: -3
LR2: -6

After how the first two sections went I was honestly thinking I'd do a lot worse, I'm usually below -3 on LG and under -5 for LR but on the other hand I'm almost always above -5 on RC so I guess the curve has a way of working it out. The games section was alright, but I know I bombed the last one by just taking 3+ minutes on one question in the third game.

Whatever, time to B.R., drill tomorrow and then another test first thing Saturday AM

Did you find one LR section harder than the other?

I assume you are referring to #15? That was kind of a nasty question. At the same time, they did reward some solid conditional logic skills with #13/#14 which didn't require any diagram.

Yeah, I scuttled HARD on the first LR section, which is weird because I usually come out on all cylinders in the first section. 2nd section I ran out of time for one question, but found it much easier.

And yeah haha. I glanced at the question after I did my experimental and figured out the answer immediately I was actually pissed that I answered it wrong, but you're right. Once you get the in/out section of the game figured out you can go through those questions pretty authoritatively.

Weird - exact opposite for me. I flew through the first LR section, got -2. One of those was *beyond* dumb. #2. I was taking like 20 seconds so I was like, "Screw it, onto the next!" and picked C...which was really dumb. #20 was kind of careless. Best LR section that I've had. LR2 I went -4 on. During BR, I fixed one of those four errors and made a new one I found the 20-2x section of LR2 quite hard for that test.

Going over the test now.

[20170322]

Did my daily packet of 3 sections. All under 30 minutes. LG -0, LR -1, RC -0. I'm starting to feel better and better about the September test.

[Instrumental]

Been trying to break 170 so hard and keep coming up short. I got a 169 a few tests ago and haven't been able to do any better. I seriously hope I didn't peak out with that one. The test I just finished (28) was a disaster. I didn't get to all the questions in any section, the second game in AR I skipped and only had enough time for two questions, but I still missed a few from the other sections. Usually with AR, if I have time for the question I get it so that's frustrating. My RC score fell big time again, I thought I had that section pretty well down, but nope. My only saving grace was only missing six in LR (five in the first section and one in the second) I only got a 164 with a whopping -23 total.

I've got to take a break before I review the questions I get wrong because I'm just angry at myself at this point. My inability to be consistent on this is pretty much the result of an underlying theme of my entire goddamned existence. FML

[proteinshake]

Been trying to break 170 so hard and keep coming up short. I got a 169 a few tests ago and haven't been able to do any better. I seriously hope I didn't peak out with that one. The test I just finished (28) was a disaster. I didn't get to all the questions in any section, the second game in AR I skipped and only had enough time for two questions, but I still missed a few from the other sections. Usually with AR, if I have time for the question I get it so that's frustrating. My RC score fell big time again, I thought I had that section pretty well down, but nope. My only saving grace was only missing six in LR (five in the first section and one in the second) I only got a 164 with a whopping -23 total.

I've got to take a break before I review the questions I get wrong because I'm just angry at myself at this point. My inability to be consistent on this is pretty much the result of an underlying theme of my entire goddamned existence. FML

if you can score a 169, you can score a 178. I thought I peaked at a 169 last time I studied for this but I actually haven't scored below 173 in a while. don't worry, just keep working on your weak sections.

[Alexandros]

Just finished doing all 19 grouping distribution games, and the games from 57. (I like that dinosaur game! )
Going to redo the LR from 55 and 65 this evening.
And for RC - read a book.

[Mikey]

Debating if I should BR this RC section that I did earlier or not. I'm thinking of redoing it since my mind wasn't completely in the game before. Not redoing it now, but later on, maybe next week. I know I did shitty on it, but idk.

Thoughts?

[34iplaw]

Debating if I should BR this RC section that I did earlier or not. I'm thinking of redoing it since my mind wasn't completely in the game before. Not redoing it now, but later on, maybe next week. I know I did shitty on it, but idk.

Thoughts?

I don't see the harm in just doing it again (after giving it some breathing room) and then BRing it. Just realize that you may outperform a little on it! That's all. I may do something similar with June 2007. I never BRd it (was never aware of that) so I think I'd probably benefit from just taking it and then going into BR.

[Mikey]

Debating if I should BR this RC section that I did earlier or not. I'm thinking of redoing it since my mind wasn't completely in the game before. Not redoing it now, but later on, maybe next week. I know I did shitty on it, but idk.

Thoughts?

I don't see the harm in just doing it again (after giving it some breathing room) and then BRing it. Just realize that you may outperform a little on it! That's all. I may do something similar with June 2007. I never BRd it (was never aware of that) so I think I'd probably benefit from just taking it and then going into BR.

iight cool.

Just did 10 high level difficulty NA questions and went 9/10 on them. Kind of confused as to how the one I got wrong isn't right but hey it's the lsat.

[34iplaw]

Debating if I should BR this RC section that I did earlier or not. I'm thinking of redoing it since my mind wasn't completely in the game before. Not redoing it now, but later on, maybe next week. I know I did shitty on it, but idk.

Thoughts?

I don't see the harm in just doing it again (after giving it some breathing room) and then BRing it. Just realize that you may outperform a little on it! That's all. I may do something similar with June 2007. I never BRd it (was never aware of that) so I think I'd probably benefit from just taking it and then going into BR.

iight cool.

Just did 10 high level difficulty NA questions and went 9/10 on them. Kind of confused as to how the one I got wrong isn't right but hey it's the lsat.

Which one?

[Mikey]

Debating if I should BR this RC section that I did earlier or not. I'm thinking of redoing it since my mind wasn't completely in the game before. Not redoing it now, but later on, maybe next week. I know I did shitty on it, but idk.

Thoughts?

I don't see the harm in just doing it again (after giving it some breathing room) and then BRing it. Just realize that you may outperform a little on it! That's all. I may do something similar with June 2007. I never BRd it (was never aware of that) so I think I'd probably benefit from just taking it and then going into BR.

iight cool.

Just did 10 high level difficulty NA questions and went 9/10 on them. Kind of confused as to how the one I got wrong isn't right but hey it's the lsat.

Which one?

PT37 S4 Q15

[+] Spoiler

I chose C with great confidence but it's wrong. To me it makes sense though and I really want to understand it before moving to the 7sage explanation for it.

[34iplaw]

Debating if I should BR this RC section that I did earlier or not. I'm thinking of redoing it since my mind wasn't completely in the game before. Not redoing it now, but later on, maybe next week. I know I did shitty on it, but idk.

Thoughts?

I don't see the harm in just doing it again (after giving it some breathing room) and then BRing it. Just realize that you may outperform a little on it! That's all. I may do something similar with June 2007. I never BRd it (was never aware of that) so I think I'd probably benefit from just taking it and then going into BR.

iight cool.

Just did 10 high level difficulty NA questions and went 9/10 on them. Kind of confused as to how the one I got wrong isn't right but hey it's the lsat.

Which one?

PT37 S4 Q15

[+] Spoiler

I chose C with great confidence but it's wrong. To me it makes sense though and I really want to understand it before moving to the 7sage explanation for it.

Not sure why I thought I would be able to find it so easily. That said, my general rule of thumb for understanding why a necessary assumption question is wrong typically follows:

does its negation completely destroy the argument?

and for the question type as well as others.

did you make sure that the argument didn't qualify your selected answer out of relevance? I can't really recall how or whether this plays into 2Ns to be honest, but, in my head, it feels like it could.

[Mikey]

Debating if I should BR this RC section that I did earlier or not. I'm thinking of redoing it since my mind wasn't completely in the game before. Not redoing it now, but later on, maybe next week. I know I did shitty on it, but idk.

Thoughts?

I don't see the harm in just doing it again (after giving it some breathing room) and then BRing it. Just realize that you may outperform a little on it! That's all. I may do something similar with June 2007. I never BRd it (was never aware of that) so I think I'd probably benefit from just taking it and then going into BR.

iight cool.

Just did 10 high level difficulty NA questions and went 9/10 on them. Kind of confused as to how the one I got wrong isn't right but hey it's the lsat.

Which one?

PT37 S4 Q15

[+] Spoiler

I chose C with great confidence but it's wrong. To me it makes sense though and I really want to understand it before moving to the 7sage explanation for it.

Not sure why I thought I would be able to find it so easily. That said, my general rule of thumb for understanding why a necessary assumption question is wrong typically follows:

does its negation completely destroy the argument?

and for the question type as well as others.

did you make sure that the argument didn't qualify your selected answer out of relevance? I can't really recall how or whether this plays into 2Ns to be honest, but, in my head, it feels like it could.

Now that I look at it, I kind of misinterpreted the argument. The right and answer looked attractive to me at first but the wrong answer that I picked looked even more attractive because of my misunderstanding of the stimulus. I chose the wrong answer because it FELT like a NA but now that I look at it, it seems like a SA. I'll be looking at the 7sage video in a bit though because although I see where I went wrong, I'm still not too confident about it. The right answer seems like a SA as well instead of a NA.. Hmm.. I'll report back after the vid!

[34iplaw]

Debating if I should BR this RC section that I did earlier or not. I'm thinking of redoing it since my mind wasn't completely in the game before. Not redoing it now, but later on, maybe next week. I know I did shitty on it, but idk.

Thoughts?

I don't see the harm in just doing it again (after giving it some breathing room) and then BRing it. Just realize that you may outperform a little on it! That's all. I may do something similar with June 2007. I never BRd it (was never aware of that) so I think I'd probably benefit from just taking it and then going into BR.

iight cool.

Just did 10 high level difficulty NA questions and went 9/10 on them. Kind of confused as to how the one I got wrong isn't right but hey it's the lsat.

Which one?

PT37 S4 Q15

[+] Spoiler

I chose C with great confidence but it's wrong. To me it makes sense though and I really want to understand it before moving to the 7sage explanation for it.

Not sure why I thought I would be able to find it so easily. That said, my general rule of thumb for understanding why a necessary assumption question is wrong typically follows:

does its negation completely destroy the argument?

and for the question type as well as others.

did you make sure that the argument didn't qualify your selected answer out of relevance? I can't really recall how or whether this plays into 2Ns to be honest, but, in my head, it feels like it could.

Now that I look at it, I kind of misinterpreted the argument. The right and answer looked attractive to me at first but the wrong answer that I picked looked even more attractive because of my misunderstanding of the stimulus. I chose the wrong answer because it FELT like a NA but now that I look at it, it seems like a SA. I'll be looking at the 7sage video in a bit though because although I see where I went wrong, I'm still not too confident about it. The right answer seems like a SA as well instead of a NA.. Hmm.. I'll report back after the vid!

Ah - okay haha. Sorry I wasn't of more help. I do feel like it will be one of those two things or kind of a 'duh' moment (i.e. misread a word or didn't notice a subtle shift of something)

I feel like I'm slowly developing cutesie names for flaws.

When they take a lack of evidence of proof of the opposite, that's the 'nessy.'

When they assume there is only one of two possible things (especially when it's clear), that's the goldilocks (just thought of this one, so I'll be really sad if I got it wrong... I just jotted ...just right... in a creepy fashion next to the stimulus.)

I guess we have to entertain ourselves somehow.

[Alexandros]

I really don't think any one thing has helped my speed for LR quite as much as my burning hatred for this section. If you can go -0 on LR in ~25 min, then that's ten minutes less you have to spend logically reasoning.

[ngogirl12]

So, I finished up 8 passages today, I totally bombed RC Science. There were two passages I had two read a few times because I had no idea what I read (bacteria measuring itself when it senses its environment and the similarity with linguistics and math's explanatory relationship with science).

Legal:
P1: -0 8/8
P2: -2 5/7
P3: -2 5/7
P4: -0 7/7

Science:
P1: -2 4/6
P2: -4 4/8
P3: -2 3/5
P4: -4 2/6

Some valuable lessons learned. 1) I didn't listen to the Nature journal podcast yesterday and today, so maybe that is improving my Science understanding; 2) I didn't get enough sleep last night, I kept waking up; 3) I need a better strategy for when I don't understand anything I'm reading; 4) I suck at Science passages;

So overall, I need to do something to fix my Science passage rut.. Any ideas?

I just reviewed most of the questions on my own. Now going to hit up 7Sage so I can watch JY dissect 3 of the passages (one of the legal ones tripped me up, the dicta vs. holding one), and look at his and Manhattan's explanations. I had looked at Manhattan for a LR question a few days ago, and the same faulty reasoning was on a RC question I got it correct bc I remembered the faulty reason lol.

[PhiladelphiaCollins]

B.Ring the first half of PT65 that I did this afternoon, and maybe its just mental fatigue but holy shit that last game (hour long generations) is a slug fest

[34iplaw]

So, I finished up 8 passages today, I totally bombed RC Science. There were two passages I had two read a few times because I had no idea what I read (bacteria measuring itself when it senses its environment and the similarity with linguistics and math's explanatory relationship with science).

Legal:
P1: -0 8/8
P2: -2 5/7
P3: -2 5/7
P4: -0 7/7

Science:
P1: -2 4/6
P2: -4 4/8
P3: -2 3/5
P4: -4 2/6

Some valuable lessons learned. 1) I didn't listen to the Nature journal podcast yesterday and today, so maybe that is improving my Science understanding; 2) I didn't get enough sleep last night, I kept waking up; 3) I need a better strategy for when I don't understand anything I'm reading; 4) I suck at Science passages;

So overall, I need to do something to fix my Science passage rut.. Any ideas?

I just reviewed most of the questions on my own. Now going to hit up 7Sage so I can watch JY dissect 3 of the passages (one of the legal ones tripped me up, the dicta vs. holding one), and look at his and Manhattan's explanations. I had looked at Manhattan for a LR question a few days ago, and the same faulty reasoning was on a RC question I got it correct bc I remembered the faulty reason lol.

TBH, I'm not the best to critique on RC. I'm quite strong untimed, but timed is a weakness. That said, don't get hung up on words in language passages if that is an issue. Something will either be defined, can be defined relatively easily from context, or its' meaning doesn't matter.

[34iplaw]

B.Ring the first half of PT65 that I did this afternoon, and maybe its just mental fatigue but holy shit that last game (hour long generations) is a slug fest

That game sucked. I got every question on it that I got to, but I just ran out of time trying to convert answer choices. Spoiler for the trick if you want it... that said, the rule substitution wasn't actually that bad.

[+] Spoiler

It's a simple sequencing game. I made the mistake of stopping one step too early which just made interpreting answers a pain in the ass.

my set up was like |GG|,r,s,t,w with six slots (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5) and three hypos with |GG| in 1-1.5, 2-2.5, and 3-3.5. The trick...

place the GG block in each of those three spots... write your not rules with the T thing... erase the last slot and change the times to the show number.

[34iplaw]

June 1998 LR2 #17 is a sneaky question. Not hard but definitely tripped up so many people on autopilot. I could see that easily as a de-180er.

Also, certain questions they love using the same concepts for the same answers. It's really weird. The one that comes to mind are fossils and evidence about ancestry. This seems to be really common with lack of evidence type flaws and such.

[ngogirl12]

TBH, I'm not the best to critique on RC. I'm quite strong untimed, but timed is a weakness. That said, don't get hung up on words in language passages if that is an issue. Something will either be defined, can be defined relatively easily from context, or its' meaning doesn't matter.

Thanks, I will try this. I notice I am particularly bad at biology passages. So maybe I should up my reading on biology related scholarly articles.

[ngogirl12]

I just finished reviewing the passages. I cannot believe I spent the entire day doing RC, I really thought I would be more diverse in my prep and more efficient. Oh well. 8 passages + intense review isn't so bad, I guess.

One thing I noticed in my review, is both one of the passages I did yesterday and one I did today (a science one today) had the correct answer verbatim from the passage. Also, one of the passages I was hung up on, the correct answer to a question was the opposite of what was given in the passage. So, the passage was about bacteria being able to measure a attractant in its gradient. The question was about repellents, from that you had to find the information about how the bacteria operated when it was close to an attractant, and the correct answer is the opposite of that. Interesting.

Finally, I know IP gave me the definition of phenomenon the other day, but I looked it up on google and I think the definition will help me with answering RC questions. Google says "a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question."

Definitely happy to take a break from RC now.

[Pozzo]

.