September 2014 Retakers Forum

[Calbears123]

So I'm sure this question is buried somewhere within these forums...but nonetheless here I go:

161 on my first take when I was PTing very consistently around 167. Any idea how long I need to study for to get back up to where I was before the test? Will I need 1 month, 2 months, or should I start tomorrow? I know much of this is context based, but what's the general suggested area for re-taking?

The great thing about the LSAT is it doesn't take that long to get back to where you were PT (just how the test works i guess). Probably a few days at best

[Calbears123]

Anyone know if there is a quick LSAT "refresher" I'm just looking for something relatively short that hits on the main points for each LR question type and maybe a quick review into formal logic. I'm not going to re read my 500 page books because I'm 90% of the way there, just need some review

[Syergin]

Checking in.

Was very disappointed yesterday opening that email and immediately seeing a 164. I had been practicing between 169-173 for over two months with my last full PT being 173.

I went perfect on the final logic game, but I was shocked to see that I totally bombed LR (I think I was at least -6 on each), especially since on test day I remember thinking the questions were very standard. Also a sub par performance in RC, -6, but I knew I rushed and finished with like 6-7 minutes remaining.

I'm getting the Manhattan LR and RC books and going back to the basics, and focusing much more on drilling LR this time around. I'll probably only start pt's 4-5 weeks out, and I plan on using 5 individual sections from 5 tests for each test the first few weeks; that way my focus is more on raw score per section.

I'm chalking this up to nerves. I've put to much work into this to accept below 170.

[Aristocat]

Checking in. I signed up for September as soon as I saw the 161 yesterday :/. It was at least a 6pt improvement from my first take (when I didn't study and was a total newb) but still unacceptable to waste a 3.7 on. It seems that many of us did poorly on test day relative to what we were pt'ing. I was doing 164-169 in the month leading up to the test, but inexplicably bombed LG and didn't do so hot on the other sections. I'm definitely blaming it on nerves too. GL everyone!

[hsquetzal]

163 first take, 3.95 lsac gpa, Hispanic urm... t14 dreams.

Do I have a chance or should I retake?

Does anyone know of good retake strategies that don't involve starting over with my prep books?

[d0rklord]

Got a 160 on my first go around...

I didn't really study (I'm insanely lazy) and hopefully I will buckle down for Sept!

It's hard to balance full time work and studying, but I need to make it happen.

Anyone else feeling guilty they didn't study from June 10-now? I am

[pmacob]

.

[adman921]

Hey all -- got a 165 on June LSAT -- was PT'ing low 170's very consistently over my lsat 10 tests. Disappointed, but let's get back up and hit it again. I didn't get absolutely destroyed by the 4th logic game (went -3, and then got my usually -2 on LG so it came out to -5 total). What I really need to do is fix up my LR -- I missed 11 questions, which is double what I missed on my worst test in my last 10 PT's. Can't happen again, so I have to focus on my strengths and not only my weaknesses this time around

[jk148706]

.

[Dipper]

I'm chalking this up to nerves. I've put to much work into this to accept below 170.

Second that.

I just ordered LSAT trainer, which I've never used before (thoughts on that, anyone?). Going to skim that then review LG Bible and Manhattan LR, with drilling each question type after each section. Going to PT this weekend just to see where I'm at, hit the books/drill, and then go back to PTs starting in August.

[180kickflip]

I'm in this. got a 163 in June. One take left. June was well below my PT (like everyone), but I'm not surprised. I think the consensus is to be consistently PTing 5 points ABOVE where you want to score because people typically score lower on the real thing. Looking back, my score was exactly 5 points under my PT average, so I got what I had coming to me.

This time I want to be consistently PTing over 173 so I can absorb the decrease better. For me, it's all about timing. I got the first 10-12 questions in each section right+ ended up guessing a few at the end as I ran out of time. If I can get better at pacing myself+ moving on from questions that are time sinks I think I should see a good bit of improvement.

[appind]

Guys,
Was RC and LR1 really difficult? Can you guys please post by how much you did worse on RC and LR1 than your average scores in these sections.

Knew that did poor on RC but felt OK with LR1.

RC: -9
LR1: -7
LR2: -2

[birdlaw624]

checking in. Got a 165 on June up from 157 in Oct 13 which is nice but I was PTing much higher. went -15 on LR which absolutely killed me. going to take the rest of the week and this weekend off and then get back to studying. is it worth drilling LR with questions that I've already seen?

[gillian]

Guys,
Was RC and LR1 really difficult? Can you guys please post by how much you did worse on RC and LR1 than your average scores in these sections.

Knew that did poor on RC but felt OK with LR1.

RC: -9
LR1: -7
LR2: -2

RC killed me with -8 I was PTing around -4. I knew I messed up RC while I was taking it, though.

I didn't find LR to be more difficult than usual (LR1: -4, LR2: -4). -3/-4 is average for me, so test day went the same as my PTs.

[gillian]

Did any of you use Manhattan for LR and RC? Worth it? I'm thinking about buying the books if it's going to help me. I have the LG Bible, which I've found really useful.

[Yeezus]

What are your thoughts on drilling again when you've already seen the questions? Is it worth it to get the Cambridge packets for LR? And how do you drill for RC? PT 69 and 70 are the only ones I haven't seen yet.

[PariSiamo]

Did any of you use Manhattan for LR and RC? Worth it? I'm thinking about buying the books if it's going to help me. I have the LG Bible, which I've found really useful.

The newest Manhattan LR is ridiculously long.

[birdlaw624]

What are your thoughts on drilling again when you've already seen the questions? Is it worth it to get the Cambridge packets for LR? And how do you drill for RC? PT 69 and 70 are the only ones I haven't seen yet.

I'm in a similar position. I would say it def can't hurt so I'm going to do it. For RC. I'm just going to go through all the old passages I have already seen.

Also saw this for RC which I plan on doing and think should help
http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 6&t=203798

[Dipper]

Guys,
Was RC and LR1 really difficult? Can you guys please post by how much you did worse on RC and LR1 than your average scores in these sections.

Knew that did poor on RC but felt OK with LR1.

RC: -9
LR1: -7
LR2: -2

I ate it on LR 1. I don't know why. I haven't gotten up the gumption to look at the questions yet, but here's what I got:
RC: -3
LR1: -9
LR2: -3

I seriously need to strengthen my flaw game. I feel like there were so many flaw questions on this test, and I think I have a hard problem identifying the GREATEST flaw in the argument, versus any flaw.

Does anyone want to chat (maybe this weekend?) to go over the questions in LR1?

[rebexness]

Did any of you use Manhattan for LR and RC? Worth it? I'm thinking about buying the books if it's going to help me. I have the LG Bible, which I've found really useful.

The newest Manhattan RC is legit.

[birdlaw624]

are you guys planning on fully reviewing the june test? I think I'm going to look at the types of questions I got wrong from LR so I can know what to work on and the 4th logic game but that's about it because I want to retake that test further down the road as a practice test leading up to september

[appind]

Guys,
Was RC and LR1 really difficult? Can you guys please post by how much you did worse on RC and LR1 than your average scores in these sections.

Knew that did poor on RC but felt OK with LR1.

RC: -9
LR1: -7
LR2: -2

RC killed me with -8 I was PTing around -4. I knew I messed up RC while I was taking it, though.

I didn't find LR to be more difficult than usual (LR1: -4, LR2: -4). -3/-4 is average for me, so test day went the same as my PTs.

I felt fine during LR so I am surprised to know that I went -7 on the first lr alone. I'm usually -2/-3 total on LR. I'm puzzled what else I can do. I've already drilled all prep tests and books etc.

RC I knew I had screwed up. I felt uncertain on numerous questions and had 6 mins for the last passage. RC is usually -3/-5 for me.

Really, I felt 100 percent prepped for the test. Went through over 30 PTs between this and my last take, again and reviewed every one for hours. Worse, I went lower than my december take on this one.

I don't want to delude myself but I can't help but feel that this one was tough with crazy LG and RC. If someone has tips for how to do extremely well on RC, I'm all ears.

[Dipper]

Did any of you use Manhattan for LR and RC? Worth it? I'm thinking about buying the books if it's going to help me. I have the LG Bible, which I've found really useful.

The newest Manhattan RC is legit.

Oh yeah? Do they have good strategies? RC I've generally been pretty good on but haven't been able to improve very much. I've never been able to go consistently -0/-1 (usually -2/-3). Do you think it Manhattan would help at this point?

[appind]

are you guys planning on fully reviewing the june test? I think I'm going to look at the types of questions I got wrong from LR so I can know what to work on and the 4th logic game but that's about it because I want to retake that test further down the road as a practice test leading up to september

I have run out of all prep material, so I'm not going to review it. Instead, I'll take it as PT to get a more accurate assessment of my score before the next admin.

But nothing beats a score on a totally fresh PT taken in a room with proctor. Just knowing that there is a tough 4th LG lurking or tough RC will bias the approach and give a higher score than the real thing.

[rebexness]

Did any of you use Manhattan for LR and RC? Worth it? I'm thinking about buying the books if it's going to help me. I have the LG Bible, which I've found really useful.

The newest Manhattan RC is legit.

Oh yeah? Do they have good strategies? RC I've generally been pretty good on but haven't been able to improve very much. I've never been able to go consistently -0/-1 (usually -2/-3). Do you think it Manhattan would help at this point?

I feel like they approach it similarly to how the LSAT Trainer does- and that may be just part of it being RC in general- in that they focus on how to think and not on gimmicky nonsense that is rampant in LR and LG books. Lots of good exercises.