Difficulty of Logic Games (Feb 2010) Forum

[gltm]

Hello,

So, I'm aware many of us considered LG to be the toughest section on the Feb LSAT. However, what I would like to know is how many people thought the analytical reasoning portion of the test (Logic Games) was much more difficult than LG sections from recent tests (PT 40+).

I have always scored well on logic games, and even I believe that LG this time around were much more difficult than ones I'm used to. Who agrees with this?

Please answer only if you have written the Feb LSAT. =)

[Sandro]

Why are you asking me? I didnt take the Feb. test !

[GotYourselfAStewGoin]

I believe they were slightly more difficult, but it was my first time taking the test and it may have been nerves speaking. I had problems with time management which I never had on practice tests (had to guess on last 4). In retrospect, I should have done them in a different order than I did.

[gltm]

Why are you asking me? I didnt take the Feb. test !

Well, then my friend, I wasn't really asking you!! I was just asking those who happened to write the test and know what I'm talking about!!

[gltm]

I believe they were slightly more difficult, but it was my first time taking the test and it may have been nerves speaking. I had problems with time management which I never had on practice tests (had to guess on last 4). In retrospect, I should have done them in a different order than I did.

Ahh, you're right. It could have just been nerves. I'm sure you did great!

I wrote the test multiple times, and for me, this has been by far the hardest LG I encountered. But, it may just be because of the fact that while preparing for the Feb LSAT I focused away from LG (since I was already so strong with logic games) and moved towards fixing other sections. That may have detracted from my abilities on games in general, which is why I might have deemed the section considerably difficult.

I can't wait until we get our scores in two weeks!!

[imisscollege]

they were on the tougher side i think just because the plug and chug that was necessary with the 4th game took forever. LG are my best section and it's rare that I don't finish with time to spare. I filled in my last answer as time was called. So yes I'd say they were tougher.

[existenz]

I was definitely more frustrated by Feb's games than by Sep or Dec. I'd put it on par with June, because Dinos was a major time suck if you didn't get the initial mauve inference. Feb's games weren't impossible on their own but they were time-consuming. No gimmee games here.

I guessed on three q's in this game. If I didn't miss the ones I actually attempted, then I'll hopefully be in good shape. If not, my score could be a disaster. It's always nicer to get that -0 on games and I didn't do it this time.

[so_confused]

Yes, yes, yes, and YES they were more difficult.
Please god, give us a -14 curve!

[Pricer]

One game was hard, one game was easy, two games were time consuming but of average difficulty. I'm going with average.

[gltm]

Anyone else?
Can you please answer the question if you have written the FEB LSAT?

[bgdddymtty]

I made the whole "go to law school" decision a lot later than most, and therefore probably didn't do as much prep as I should have, so I'm not very qualified to judge whether Feb 10's LG section was harder than that of other recent tests. I can say, however, that I had never failed to finish an LG section during my practice (and I usually got -0). On the Feb 10 test, the fourth game took so long that when I went back to do the one question I had skipped (the rule replacement question on the class schedule game), I was only able to narrow it down to two choices before having to guess as time expired. So, in terms of being hard to finish on time--the element that in my mind makes the LSAT truly difficult and differentiates it from other standardized exams--I found it very difficult.

[TheLuckyOne]

What types of games were on Feb test? Like in line with a new trend, more "tree" games, mixed, really wierd that have never been before etc? Was there any notable difference comparing with say June 09?

If someone can, it would be great if you found similar games from previous tests.
Thanks

[eros]

definitely more difficult imo. There was no gimme game! That just threw me off entirely, as usually there is always one game per lg section that i can blow through in about 6-7 minutes. Not this time. LSAT seems to be trending toward more tedious games which can't be solved quickly through inferences...

[tomwatts]

What types of games were on Feb test? Like in line with a new trend, more "tree" games, mixed, really wierd that have never been before etc? Was there any notable difference comparing with say June 09?

It looked a heck of a lot like 57-59. We had two In/Out games (like 58). Next, one — uh — I think the TM-derivative term is "advanced linear," but in Princeton Review terminology it's a 2D Order game. The basic idea was that it was halfway between PT 53's third game (confessions from suspects) and PT 38's fourth game (Nexus, Tailwind). The final game was what we'd call a 1D Order game (forget what the other terms are), just putting stuff in order according to annoying either/or clues about their sequence.

I really felt like I was doing PT 58 over again, which might've helped, since I took 58 the Monday before and only missed one question. With some distance on it now, I really think that February was very, very much like what the previous year's games had been. We'll see what that means as far as score, though.

[TheLuckyOne]

What types of games were on Feb test? Like in line with a new trend, more "tree" games, mixed, really wierd that have never been before etc? Was there any notable difference comparing with say June 09?

It looked a heck of a lot like 57-59. We had two In/Out games (like 58). Next, one — uh — I think the TM-derivative term is "advanced linear," but in Princeton Review terminology it's a 2D Order game. The basic idea was that it was halfway between PT 53's third game (confessions from suspects) and PT 38's fourth game (Nexus, Tailwind). The final game was what we'd call a 1D Order game (forget what the other terms are), just putting stuff in order according to annoying either/or clues about their sequence.

I really felt like I was doing PT 58 over again, which might've helped, since I took 58 the Monday before and only missed one question. With some distance on it now, I really think that February was very, very much like what the previous year's games had been. We'll see what that means as far as score, though.

Thank you, Tom

[msesquire2b]

I didnt think they were difficult. My experimental section was LG too... so I am not sure which one was real. I am confident that I performed well on both.

[cr073137]

I didnt think they were more difficult, while the 4th game was just very lenghty. Halfway through the game I realized that there was a inference (cant remember now), that helped me speed through it. I wasn't able to go back to the change of rule question in the previous game, so i ended up semi-guessing that one.

[so_confused]

You're

I really felt like I was doing PT 58 over again, which might've helped, since I took 58 the Monday before and only missed one question. With some distance on it now, I really think that February was very, very much like what the previous year's games had been. We'll see what that means as far as score, though.

You're kidding me right? PT 58 felt substantially different than Feb's LG.

[TheLuckyOne]

You're

I really felt like I was doing PT 58 over again, which might've helped, since I took 58 the Monday before and only missed one question. With some distance on it now, I really think that February was very, very much like what the previous year's games had been. We'll see what that means as far as score, though.

You're kidding me right? PT 58 felt substantially different than Feb's LG.

Ok then, mind elaborating?

[thunder 85]

I felt the games were near identical to Dec (59)in terms of how to approach. Overall difficulty wasn't necessarily harder than the two tests before, but that said I could understand having 57 and 58 down and going in flat. The back weighted test, where each question involved testing the answers was IIRC a bigger part of 59 than either of the previous tests in 09.

[Creed Fan]

All I know is that I'm happy the experimental games didn't count (professors/terms was no good).

[PigNipple]

They seemed pretty standard to me, though my experimental was killer - they were all about matching people to people, one being about matching editors to papers written by students, I think.

[iiifly]

All I can say is, after I finished Section 1 (LG), I said to myself "I hope this was the experimental." When I found that Section 3 was LG as well, I was like, "woohoo, I got another chance at this!" But when I finished that section, I prayed to god that Section 1 was the one that actually counted!

[Creed Fan]

Sorry if I come off as sounding arrogant, but I as I was doing LG on sec 1 I was thinking, "There are too easy to be the real games." Then once the sec 3 LG appeared, my heart sank and I definitely struggled

I headed into the break in a funk. I was able to rise up and finish strong, and I was relieved to find out the mixer game was "for real" when I came home and then I watched No Country For Old Men (not overly impressed).