The 160s Club! Join all ye 170 hopefuls! Forum

[sayan]

PT 51

RC: -1
LR1: 0
RC (ex): 0
LR2: -1
LG: 0

My first 180. Very happy

[RMstratosphere]

Dont want to ignite a firestorm of conflicting opinions... but...

Out of PTs 52-57 (I have up to 56 at the moment) are any overly strange? I.e. should I make sure to do one over another, other things being equal and I can't do them all?

55 has a notoriously hard RC passage and 57 has the dino game which people bitched about.

Which RC passage is that (I did 55 last Saturday and it was my worst RC in months)?

[sayan]

Dont want to ignite a firestorm of conflicting opinions... but...

Out of PTs 52-57 (I have up to 56 at the moment) are any overly strange? I.e. should I make sure to do one over another, other things being equal and I can't do them all?

55 has a notoriously hard RC passage and 57 has the dino game which people bitched about.

Which RC passage is that (I did 55 last Saturday and it was my worst RC in months)?

Talk story

[RMstratosphere]

PT 55

LR (-3)
RC (-5)
LR (-2)
LG (-0)*

Raw: 90
Scaled: 169

My best score yet but with a hint of disappointment. When I tallied my raw score I thought I would have gotten my first 170!

*My first perfect logic games section...ever.

[RMstratosphere]

Dont want to ignite a firestorm of conflicting opinions... but...

Out of PTs 52-57 (I have up to 56 at the moment) are any overly strange? I.e. should I make sure to do one over another, other things being equal and I can't do them all?

55 has a notoriously hard RC passage and 57 has the dino game which people bitched about.

Which RC passage is that (I did 55 last Saturday and it was my worst RC in months)?

Talk story

My apologies- I misread and thought the PT in discussion was #51 not #55. I just did 55 today.

[sayan]

PT 55 - Raw: 94 (-6) Scaled: 174

RC: -3
LR: -1
LG: -2

I am happy with the score itself but a little disappointed in my performance, if that makes any sense. I got 2 LG's wrong, which pisses me off -- I also took WAY too long on one of the games...must have been 10+ minutes. It bothers me to know that these things still can happen so late into the game.

Same thing happened in PT 51: I went into the last game with 15minutes and only came out with about 3-4. For some reason I'm not used to the sequencing games although they are very easy. I attest it to the fact that I don't internalize the sequences into my head so I have to look at the rules a lot. Quite bad but I rather be precise than quick.

[legallybrunette16]

YES! finally! My goal has been to break 166 on test day! Thank you to everyone who has given me advice on RC! the last strategy (to just take my time and thoroughly get through the first 3 passages with near perfection, then do the fourth one with remaining time going to line references) REALLLLY helped!!!

Two days ago I scored a 163, and went -8 on RC!

TODAY....

preptest 48:

LR1: -1
LG: -1
RC: -3
LR2: -5

raw score: 90 scaled: 168!!!

with 2 weeks left i'm feeling prettty great!

[Slimpee]

Last week I joined the practice 170 club w/ a 171 on PT something in the 30's. I was obviously pleased but I had a -12 raw score so the scale was awfully nice to me.

I then followed up w/ a 164 which did not make me so happy.

Today, I hit 170 on PT 36. Again, it's a bit old but here's my raw:

LR 1: -2
RC: -1 (I was 11-12 minutes in after my first passage but finished with about 4 minutes left)
LR 2: -2
LG: -7

Raw: -12

I'm thrilled with the LR and RC because i've always known I could pull a score like this but LG still infuriates me! I don't know why I can't do it! I know that I can score well enough for a 170 in LR and RC but LG is worrying the hell out of me!

Here's the the next two week of studying, everyone!

[dakatz]

Took PT 51 today. Here was the breakdown:

LG -0
LR1 -4
LR2 -5
RC -5

Raw Score: 86, Scaled Score: 168

This is getting so frustrating. I've been on the cusp of 170 for over a month and I just can't break that ceiling. I've managed to get my LG down to -0 or -1 on pretty much every test. I studied that extra hard in order to buy myself some leeway with RC. I always get between -4 and -6 wrong on RC, but I figured that I could balance it out with consistently solid LG performance. It was LR that bummed me out a bit today. This test just seemed to have a few more confusing questions/answer choices than some other recent tests. I usually get -6 or -7 on LR. And had I fallen within that LR range on this test, I would have had my first 170, but it wasn't meant to be I guess. Oh well, at least I am scoring within a consistent range and not fluctuating downward at any point. Past few tests are 167, 169, 166, 167, 168. Would really love to break 170 just a single time...

[dakatz]

PT 55 - Raw: 94 (-6) Scaled: 174

RC: -3
LR: -1
LG: -2

I am happy with the score itself but a little disappointed in my performance, if that makes any sense. I got 2 LG's wrong, which pisses me off -- I also took WAY too long on one of the games...must have been 10+ minutes. It bothers me to know that these things still can happen so late into the game.

Same thing happened in PT 51: I went into the last game with 15minutes and only came out with about 3-4. For some reason I'm not used to the sequencing games although they are very easy. I attest it to the fact that I don't internalize the sequences into my head so I have to look at the rules a lot. Quite bad but I rather be precise than quick.

Its ok to not internalize the sequences. Its all about the diagram and the way you draw it out. At least for me, once it becomes visual, I can see all the possibilities and map it all out without really doing too much. That way, no sequencing game of that type takes more than 5 or 6 minutes. Make sure to make a visualization that connects every single rule, not just disconnected rules. Draw out a hypothetical or two just to see how it works. And definitely write out your "not-rules", as in which factors can't go in which spaces. These limitations certainly help speed up the game.

[Slimpee]

Took PT 51 today. Here was the breakdown:

LG -0
LR1 -4
LR2 -5
RC -5

Raw Score: 86, Scaled Score: 168

This is getting so frustrating. I've been on the cusp of 170 for over a month and I just can't break that ceiling. I've managed to get my LG down to -0 or -1 on pretty much every test. I studied that extra hard in order to buy myself some leeway with RC. I always get between -4 and -6 wrong on RC, but I figured that I could balance it out with consistently solid LG performance. It was LR that bummed me out a bit today. This test just seemed to have a few more confusing questions/answer choices than some other recent tests. I usually get -6 or -7 on LR. And had I fallen within that LR range on this test, I would have had my first 170, but it wasn't meant to be I guess. Oh well, at least I am scoring within a consistent range and not fluctuating downward at any point. Past few tests are 167, 169, 166, 167, 168. Would really love to break 170 just a single time...

Seriously, I would kill for your LG score...if I could get -0 i'd be sitting at or above 170 almost every time. Keep at it!

[dakatz]

Took PT 51 today. Here was the breakdown:

LG -0
LR1 -4
LR2 -5
RC -5

Raw Score: 86, Scaled Score: 168

This is getting so frustrating. I've been on the cusp of 170 for over a month and I just can't break that ceiling. I've managed to get my LG down to -0 or -1 on pretty much every test. I studied that extra hard in order to buy myself some leeway with RC. I always get between -4 and -6 wrong on RC, but I figured that I could balance it out with consistently solid LG performance. It was LR that bummed me out a bit today. This test just seemed to have a few more confusing questions/answer choices than some other recent tests. I usually get -6 or -7 on LR. And had I fallen within that LR range on this test, I would have had my first 170, but it wasn't meant to be I guess. Oh well, at least I am scoring within a consistent range and not fluctuating downward at any point. Past few tests are 167, 169, 166, 167, 168. Would really love to break 170 just a single time...

Seriously, I would kill for your LG score...if I could get -0 i'd be sitting at or above 170 almost every time. Keep at it!

Lol if only we could trade RC and LG sections, we would be set

[JJDancer]

Yea so I have no choice but to take a hit on my RC. I remember in 6th grade I was testing at a 4th grade reading comprehension level and had to have special sessions with a tutor during class :/ (I'm an ESL)

PT 54 Results
RC: -9
LR1: -2
LG: -0
LR2: -3
RC (exp): -9

Raw: 87 Scaled: 166 (I would settle for this on test day )

For the 1st RC, I just tried to read 3 passages accurately and guess on the last one (guessed 2 right out of 5)

For the last RC, I read all 4 passages. Now I'm just confused about which strategy I should implement on test day

Try doing a few practice sections of RC (separate from a PT) to practice. Also, if you want to only attempt 3 passages then spend 30 seconds or so looking at things like "does one passage have 9 questions versus another with only 6?" Do the one with the most questions first even if it takes you 11 minutes or whatever. Other things you can consider is skipping the law passage or science passage or whichever ones usually have more confusing language for you. Also, try different strategies for the passage (if you only attempt 3) like marking the main point and writing a few words "skeleton" of the organization of the passage.
Example:
p1 (paragraph 1): ID prob w trad theory (Identifies problem with the traditional theory)
p2: suggests new theory - POV: good. (point of view- good .. to me that would just mean the author supports this theory instead).

Hope it helps.

[JJDancer]

PT 54:
RAW: 94
SCALED: 173

YESS!!

PT 55:
RAW: 93
SCALED: 172

LR -1
RC -4 (what!?)
LG -0
LR -2

It is sooo exciting for me to only miss 3-4 LR in each of these tests.
I hope to get that as close to -0 as possible but it is still an amazing feeling.
Not getting too relaxed with the -0 on LG because I ran out of time last week on a section and I haven't done PT 57 yet.
The past few PTs I have taken I haven't had any extraordinary conditions. Today I was prepared for the cold room and being hungry but the "half-desk" can get really annoying. Also, I have a tennis elbow type of condition that was flaring out of control. I was literally massaging my arm as I read stimuli/passages. It was NOT fun at all so the fact that I pulled off a 172 is a relief. Anything can happen on test day and although I took 5-10 seconds during the test to calm myself from time to time, I'm proud of my performance.

Don't let anyone tell you that you can't improve 1, 3, 5, or even 8 points in 2 weeks. You can.
(And sometimes doing 2 PTs a day isn't the best way to do it!)

[Cossack]

I cannot comprehend how people get so good on LR... my weakest section by far, with -8 wrong on average per section... LG is my strongest

[rbhesser]

Feeling better now.

PT 54

RC: -2
LR1: -1
LG: -0
LR2:-5

Raw: 93
Scaled: 172

I took 3 tests 3 days in a row and got 167s on all of them. It was getting frustrating so I took a day off and then did a simulated test day today. I used one of my new tests, added an experimental section, and kept close tabs on time in between/ breaks. This is exceptionally sweet because its my highest raw score yet, and the first time since taking June 2007 as my diagnostic that I have taken one of the newer tests. I just need to not get so tired and screw up the last section like I seem to always do.

[ruleser]

PT 51

RC: -1
LR1: 0
RC (ex): 0
LR2: -1
LG: 0

My first 180. Very happy

What is the trick to beating RC? - it's still the only section I've never gotten a -0 on. At least I'm down to generally -1 or -2, but never over that last hump...

Today I devoted to RC mainly, got killed by an old (1996) section , -5. Yikes. Went right back at another old one, -2, then a somewhat newer one, -2 again. I'm beginning to I think get the question type I miss (which is why drilling one section instead of PT's seems to help the most for improvement) I find I eliminate the correct answer on these just because I think it is a bit out there - I've started only xing out ones I really know are wrong, and so now am down to having the correct choices left on those couple I don't get - but man, sometimes it is such a leap where they go with it. But now having identified those, I see the pattern - there are 2 left after you x out the ones that are for sure wrong - one of the ones left sounds about right, but if you read super close and check back the text like 1 word is slightly off; and the second one left you really have to make a large inference to get.

Anyone else who's gone -0 on RC have any tips to make that last leap?

In maybe better news, I jumped after all that RC to an old LG (test 38/oct 2002) - barely finished (hope that means it was a hard one) but pulled out the -0. So now back to RC RC RC.

[Kulax22]

Did PT55 yesterday... in some ways my best yet:

LR -1
RC -1
LR -0 (exp. PT41)
LR -1
LG -4

Raw 93~172

I was both really happy with the good performance on everything BUT LG. Was this LG really tough? NO!

I misread a rule My brain inserted a tiny little word "not" into the rules of the second LG game I burnt a lot of time pounding sand and then realized my mistake. I was actually lucky it was only -4 because I had to rush like a madman

This was exactly my greatest fear. It took me from 177 to 172... while I'm happy to be in the 170s, it's crazy to think that could make the difference between HYS or not.

I'm praying I don't do that junk on test day. Might need to double-check all LG rules from now on. I've done this crap before...

[teaadntoast]

Yay!

170 on PT54

RC: -2
LR1: -4 (ouch!)
LG: - 3
LR2: -1

Raw: 91
Scaled: 170

Three of the four that I missed in my first LR section were one right after the other. I need to learn to let go of a question once I'm done with it and move on, rather than ruminating!

(I included an experimental LR section, on which I went -2.)

[lawduder]

PT53

LR -6(help?)
LG -0
LR -2
RC -4

raw 89
scaled 169 (2nd time )

Couple of things, I hate strawberry field pests and Hawaiian poetry. It's nice to be so "close" to the magic number, but it's also disheartening to not be there yet. Overall, I'm proud to have come this far from my 146 diagnostic and I only hope to make one last LR break through before test day.

[Tangerine Gleam]

PT 32 -- Raw: 93 Scaled: 175

RC: -3
LR: -3
LG: -2

This test had a super-forgiving curve! I am also really pissed that I haven't been getting -0 LG every time.

I accept the fact that LR and RC will be harder to ace...but dammit, these LG's should be clockwork by now.

I'm going to return to recent tests by doing the June 2009 LSAT on Wednesday. All of this time hearing about the Dinos -- now I can finally face them and see what all the hype is about!

[mountaintime]

Did PT55 yesterday... in some ways my best yet:

LR -1
RC -1
LR -0 (exp. PT41)
LR -1
LG -4

Raw 93~172

I was both really happy with the good performance on everything BUT LG. Was this LG really tough? NO!

I misread a rule My brain inserted a tiny little word "not" into the rules of the second LG game I burnt a lot of time pounding sand and then realized my mistake. I was actually lucky it was only -4 because I had to rush like a madman

This was exactly my greatest fear. It took me from 177 to 172... while I'm happy to be in the 170s, it's crazy to think that could make the difference between HYS or not.

I'm praying I don't do that junk on test day. Might need to double-check all LG rules from now on. I've done this crap before...

Ugh, I had a very similar experience with PT 55 this morning. LR1: -1, RC: -2, LR2: -0, LG -5. I had a bitchmade little freakout on the LG portion. I should have been -1 or -2 for that section; my ability to recognize inferences was basically nonexistent. -5 is the worst Ive done on LG in quite a while.

[soupisgood]

PT 54 (timed w/ experimental)

RC: -3 (3B, 21D, 27E)
LR1: -2 (7A, 20A)
RC (exp): -3 (1A, 12C, 26A)
LG: -2 (1C, 22C)
LR2: -2 (8D, 21E)

Raw: 92
Scaled: 171

I'm happy that my RC scores are climbing back up (after I ditched the methods taught to me in my prep course, which were leading to -6 sections), but a little disappointed by my sloppy mistakes in LG, considering that I finished the section with several minutes to spare. Though on a happier note, my experimental RC was from PT 45, with the Hippocratic oath passage I had heard so much about. I was glad to see that I didn't bomb it, like I did that Chinese talk story passage in 55.

[ruleser]

PT 54 (timed w/ experimental)

RC: -3 (3B, 21D, 27E)
LR1: -2 (7A, 20A)
RC (exp): -3 (1A, 12C, 26A)
LG: -2 (1C, 22C)
LR2: -2 (8D, 21E)

Raw: 92
Scaled: 171

I'm happy that my RC scores are climbing back up (after I ditched the methods taught to me in my prep course, which were leading to -6 sections), but a little disappointed by my sloppy mistakes in LG, considering that I finished the section with several minutes to spare. Though on a happier note, my experimental RC was from PT 45, with the Hippocratic oath passage I had heard so much about. I was glad to see that I didn't bomb it, like I did that Chinese talk story passage in 55.

+1 Which course did you take? I took PowerScore - I went from -2 on an actual LSAT prior to the course to -5's and 6's (-5 on the actual LSAT) Deal is there is nothing much to teach about RC, but PowerScore wants to pretend they offer something so they get you to underline, make notes of lists, etc. It can ruin you. I had forgotten how I used to do it - still don't really remember, but now just back to reading through without underlining and getting -1 or -2.

[sayan]

Did PT55 yesterday... in some ways my best yet:

LR -1
RC -1
LR -0 (exp. PT41)
LR -1
LG -4

Raw 93~172

I was both really happy with the good performance on everything BUT LG. Was this LG really tough? NO!

I misread a rule My brain inserted a tiny little word "not" into the rules of the second LG game I burnt a lot of time pounding sand and then realized my mistake. I was actually lucky it was only -4 because I had to rush like a madman

This was exactly my greatest fear. It took me from 177 to 172... while I'm happy to be in the 170s, it's crazy to think that could make the difference between HYS or not.

I'm praying I don't do that junk on test day. Might need to double-check all LG rules from now on. I've done this crap before...

Ugh, I had a very similar experience with PT 55 this morning. LR1: -1, RC: -2, LR2: -0, LG -5. I had a bitchmade little freakout on the LG portion. I should have been -1 or -2 for that section; my ability to recognize inferences was basically nonexistent. -5 is the worst Ive done on LG in quite a while.

I had a similar experience in Prep test C. I almost always score 0 (occasionally a -1) but I simply wasn't making the inferences and ended up running out of time with a resulting -5. Very disappointing considering the day before I scored a 180.

I suppose it was probably because I was extremely tired after waking up very early but still. The worst thing possible is missing a key inference and bombing the entire game (or worse... taking way too long and bombing subsequent games because you have no time left). I stopped doing the test right after that since I knew I was out of it. Going to go back to it today and redo it though.