. Forum

[Knock]

.

[ZombiesAhead]

As far as logic games, you can make a super-easy or super-hard game in ANY of those PS categories. No sense ranking them, IMO.

The only definition of "hard" that I can reconcile with LSAT is "hard-to-learn". So, from "hardest" to "easiest":

1. RC
2. LR
3. LG

When I took the test cold, the above list was flipped upside down but you can learn LG in a few weeks, LR in a few months, and I'm still not sure about RC.

What the hell is a "part DEF" reading comprehension section?



btw, you carry glock?

[Knock]

.

[TheTopBloke]

They're not difficult. They're all equally fun!

[ZombiesAhead]

There's no classification to RC although you might start seeing typical "methods of reasoning" if you will for passages. Some have competing viewpoints, others tell a story, others talk about how awesome some minority-in-history was.

LG classification is good for learning, but outside of grouping vs. linear, you're better off just doing more games rather than sweating what category these things fall under. You then start to associate an unfamiliar game with your approach to some other, similar game. You won't have time to consciously identify a game by specific type and then try to remember the strategies that the LGB recommends for that type.

[Derrex]

The difficulty is probably proportional to the degree of subjectivity.

LG is easiest because all the answers are clear as day if you are smart enough to figure them out.
LR is second easiest because most questions have answers that are fairly clear, although some hard ones might be a little fuzzy or subtle around the edges.
RC is hard because it depends on how you read, something thats not easily learnable and your ability to answer questions is dependent on that. It is also the most subjective amongst all sections and answers can seem right depending on how you read the passage while really being wrong.

[bakemono]

LG's such a wildcard for me though. I can get -0 on LG sections a good portion of the time, but one bad LG game will basically destroy your entire LSAT, cause not only did you mess up on that one game, you probably spent a good amount of time on that, meaning you probably messed up your entire section.

[charlesxavier]

LG's such a wildcard for me though. I can get -0 on LG sections a good portion of the time, but one bad LG game will basically destroy your entire LSAT, cause not only did you mess up on that one game, you probably spent a good amount of time on that, meaning you probably messed up your entire section.

Definitely agree with this! I know my stuff...but one little bump can throw me off. For me, it also has a lot to do with the order. I took a PT that had RC LR LR LG LR and I did okay overall, but I was exhausted by that section 3 LR. I did great on the LG on that PT, so it saved me.

P.S.- Has anyone else found the comparative reading passage to be a nice change in pace? When I had 4 long passages it was hard to stay focused all the way through, but the comparative reading passages are easier for me and give my mind a little extra break.