October 2010 Test Prep Forum

[Aggiegrad2011]

I'm in the PT59 SS Failboat with you guys too.

What a confidence buster.

Yeah, i'm gonna do another right now to hopefully rejuice the confidence... can't go into the test feeling this way

Yep! I'm going to a PT in the 30s, last time I did one in the 30s was June, so the memory should've faded since then (In between another 30 PTs and the 2 bibles I doubt there's much residual).

I was |--| close to crying after grading PT59. My last PT was 57 and I went 90/170 so this was a gut check.

[justadude55]

59 had the hardest RC in my opinion. the noguchi passage, at least the questions and the level of detail needed on all of them was tremendous. i understand the passage, but still got 3 wrong.

Same here... I got 18 20 21 wrong

I'm in the PT59 SS Failboat with you guys too.

What a confidence buster.

the curve was nice though. you could get 3 wrong and get a 180, 18 wrong was a 167.... i think between a 170 and 180 though were very difficult scores... i don't doubt 1 in every few thousand people got a 180 or 5 out of every 100 got a 167. i do doubt that 1 out of every hundred got a 172.

i'd much rather have a hard LG than a hard RC. I think 59's games is relatively easy, the hardest game on it is about = to the easiest on 60.... but the RC is no contest. 60 didn't have a "gimme" passage on it, but the 1st one could be done in 5 minutes and the content in all of them wasn't too shabby and the questions were very general and not purposefully impossible. december's noguchi was boarderline impossible.

[catsparka]

59 had the hardest RC in my opinion. the noguchi passage, at least the questions and the level of detail needed on all of them was tremendous. i understand the passage, but still got 3 wrong.

Same here... I got 18 20 21 wrong

I'm in the PT59 SS Failboat with you guys too.

What a confidence buster.

the curve was nice though. you could get 3 wrong and get a 180, 18 wrong was a 167.... i think between a 170 and 180 though were very difficult scores... i don't doubt 1 in every few thousand people got a 180 or 5 out of every 100 got a 167. i do doubt that 1 out of every hundred got a 172.

i'd much rather have a hard LG than a hard RC. I think 59's games is relatively easy, the hardest game on it is about = to the easiest on 60.... but the RC is no contest. 60 didn't have a "gimme" passage on it, but the 1st one could be done in 5 minutes and the content in all of them wasn't too shabby and the questions were very general and not purposefully impossible. december's noguchi was boarderline impossible.

I took 9 minutes to complete the first passage in 60. I almost ran out of time (complete the section at 34:58 or something like that).

[Aggiegrad2011]

Even with the nice curve, a 66 unscaled was a 156 scaled. I got *destroyed* on the RC section, and LR definitely wasn't my hottest either (The LR bible kind of psyched me out of several answers that I normally would've gotten correct... I need to fix that for Saturday...)

Ditto on harder LG preferred to harder RC. I consider myself a fantastic reader and have the GPA in a difficult English Literature program to prove it, I got an 800 on the verbal SAT, etc and the scientific jargon of PT 59 just tossed me under the bus. I'm sorry I don't know what slowly oxidizing means. That doesn't have squat to do with me being an exceptional atty. or deserving to be in a great law school. Fortunately, this is so far the only PT I've seen with that much specialized vocabulary/context.

59 had the hardest RC in my opinion. the noguchi passage, at least the questions and the level of detail needed on all of them was tremendous. i understand the passage, but still got 3 wrong.

Same here... I got 18 20 21 wrong

I'm in the PT59 SS Failboat with you guys too.

What a confidence buster.

the curve was nice though. you could get 3 wrong and get a 180, 18 wrong was a 167.... i think between a 170 and 180 though were very difficult scores... i don't doubt 1 in every few thousand people got a 180 or 5 out of every 100 got a 167. i do doubt that 1 out of every hundred got a 172.

i'd much rather have a hard LG than a hard RC. I think 59's games is relatively easy, the hardest game on it is about = to the easiest on 60.... but the RC is no contest. 60 didn't have a "gimme" passage on it, but the 1st one could be done in 5 minutes and the content in all of them wasn't too shabby and the questions were very general and not purposefully impossible. december's noguchi was boarderline impossible.

[incompetentia]

I'm one of those who actually got curveboosted on 59. -7 to -9 seems to be my normal range regardless of curve...59 was -9 = 174 for me.

The difficult thing about 59 seems to be that NONE of the passages were gimmies...everybody is going to struggle with one or another passage out of four almost certainly but there was nowhere to make up for that (I actually did fine on Noguchi, but parallel computing killed me and ate up time.)

(Seriously, though, can anybody provide any input on this?)

[catsparka]

I just completed the RC section for PT51 (the one with the infamous Riddled Basins).

I actually really liked Riddled Basins-- it was my favorite passage out of the four. The only question I found confusing for that passage was the one where they ask about the meaning of "riddled basins" or something like that. I was debating between two choices, and went with the wrong one.

The only other question I got wrong was in the third passage. Overall happy with the -2 score.

I think generally, I prefer science-related passages over humanities-related ones. It's just easier for my to be interested and stay engaged throughout the passage. This is puzzling, since my major is in the humanities, and my scientific background is very negligible.

[JJDancer]

(Seriously, though, can anybody provide any input on this?)

I think it's a totally weird strategy so you might want to take what I say with a grain of salt. If you had been doing this over 6 tests and it had worked, I'd say do what you want but you KNOW you can consistently score 170+ (I don't remmeber your particular scores but I think they are in the 173+ range?) doing it the normal way (slower). However, you don't know if this one time thing will replicate itself.
I guess you could do it but then spend the extra 10 mins just re-checking (but deferring to your gut feeling unless you solidly know the reason behind changing an answer).
I don't recommend it though.

[bartleby]

I wouldn't do it. When I took PT55 as my last lsat before June, I was relaxed and took a "whatever" approach and made a 180: highest PT by 4 points. I tried to duplicate the relaxed "go-with-your-gut" approach this past week on two PTs and missed a bunch of easy ones in early LR. I'd chalk it up as luck and use the full 35 mins on test day.

[Chris_cpb]

June 2005 (PT 46)

RC: -4 notes: 3 out of 4 incorrect were in the last passage which was a 'law passage'.
LG: -3 notes: figure out why I scored -10 last night and -3 today on LG
LR: -4
LR: -5 notes: choked at the end, missed 22, 23, 24 and 25

Score: 165

Goal for Saturday: 166-168

Hoping to take 2-3 more PT's before Saturday. Any suggestions on which ones to take between PT's 43, 44, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51? I also have PT's 29-38 but there will be many problems in those ones I have already done.

[Lasers]

took pt 60...got 162 but realized i copied a rule down wrong in game 1 which is why i got all 6 wrong.

i was freaking out a bit after i scored it, but discovering that mistake made me feel a bit better since the game was relatively easy with the right rule.

i'm just gonna review the rest of my mistakes and then review basic general things before relaxing tomorrow.

[sarahlawg]

Tried the 5-hr energy approach tonight... I'm not a coffee drinker nor a regular consumer of caffeine, so i was a bit nervous about taking it. After 3 disappointing 165s (60, 50, 24) in a row (after averaging 169 including a 169 on 59 and a 171 on 58)... I got 171 on this test (PT 46). Evidence that it works?? Clearly not conclusive evidence, but I noticed that I have 0 headache at all and did 4 sections without a break. And I feel great now and could probably do another test!! Haha, so I think I will be drinking it before the test Saturday. I feel great, really. Hoping it is not a coincidence.

[justadude55]

[

I took 9 minutes to complete the first passage in 60. I almost ran out of time (complete the section at 34:58 or something like that).[/quote][/quote][/quote]

i finished that in 5 minutes at the end, and got everything right. the questions were based on the passages overall so it was conducive to not having to read so closely. i only looked at the questions 1st because w 5 minutes left, i wanted to employ an approach assuring me of at least 4 out of the 5 points.

[justadude55]

I wouldn't do it. When I took PT55 as my last lsat before June, I was relaxed and took a "whatever" approach and made a 180: highest PT by 4 points. I tried to duplicate the relaxed "go-with-your-gut" approach this past week on two PTs and missed a bunch of easy ones in early LR. I'd chalk it up as luck and use the full 35 mins on test day.

feel ya, did 2 today:

PT 60: 175

PT 55: 180

But 55 was a Sept/Oct test, as was 58 and 58 was significantly easier than 59 or 60 so maybe there's something about October....

[BackToTheOldHouse]

Long time stocker, first time poster on TLS.

First off, good luck to everyone on Saturday--from the looks of most of your PT scores, however, I don't know that much luck is needed .

The reason I am posting, however, is to inform you of a free download that has been mentioned on the completely worthwhile lsatblog run by Steve Schwartz. He has linked over to a free PDF copy of Anna Ivey's updated Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions.

Thought y'all might care. Better hurry if you do--the download is only available until the end of the day Sunday.

Here is a link to Steve's blog: http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/iv ... -book.html

[Cromartie]

June 2005 (PT 46)

RC: -4 notes: 3 out of 4 incorrect were in the last passage which was a 'law passage'.
LG: -3 notes: figure out why I scored -10 last night and -3 today on LG
LR: -4
LR: -5 notes: choked at the end, missed 22, 23, 24 and 25

Score: 165

Goal for Saturday: 166-168

Hoping to take 2-3 more PT's before Saturday. Any suggestions on which ones to take between PT's 43, 44, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51? I also have PT's 29-38 but there will be many problems in those ones I have already done.

The bolded is probably not a good idea. You might be able to get away with 1 PT and not go into the test mentally fatigued, but even that might be a risk at this point. Personally, I'd just go with a little section drilling this close to the test.

If you absolutely have to do 1 PT, you're looking for a confidence booster and have already taken 55-60, I'd pick PT 44 out of those you listed. I vaguely remember that PT being one of the easier ones (got a 180 without sweating the least bit).

[The Gentleman]

Well I need to stay away from this site until Saturday afternoon, so best of luck to everyone!

[CGI Fridays]

Long time stocker, first time poster on TLS.

First off, good luck to everyone on Saturday--from the looks of most of your PT scores, however, I don't know that much luck is needed .

The reason I am posting, however, is to inform you of a free download that has been mentioned on the completely worthwhile lsatblog run by Steve Schwartz. He has linked over to a free PDF copy of Anna Ivey's updated Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions.

Thought y'all might care. Better hurry if you do--the download is only available until the end of the day Sunday.

Here is a link to Steve's blog: http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/iv ... -book.html

Hello, Steve. Steve the long time stocker...

[Chris_cpb]

Long time stocker, first time poster on TLS.

First off, good luck to everyone on Saturday--from the looks of most of your PT scores, however, I don't know that much luck is needed .

The reason I am posting, however, is to inform you of a free download that has been mentioned on the completely worthwhile lsatblog run by Steve Schwartz. He has linked over to a free PDF copy of Anna Ivey's updated Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions.

Thought y'all might care. Better hurry if you do--the download is only available until the end of the day Sunday.

Here is a link to Steve's blog: http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/iv ... -book.html

Hello, Steve. Steve the long time stocker...

I wonder why a stocker is on this forum? I'm sure there's good stock market forums or warehousing forums out there somewhere.

[BackToTheOldHouse]

oops, stalker.

Just thought I would be helpful.

[NYC1010]

Can anybody direct me to the two easiest prep tests in 29-38? Already did some of them, so 2 options for my final one before the big exam Saturday would be great. Thanks.

[CGI Fridays]

oops, stalker.

Just thought I would be helpful.

Sorry, I was only a dick because I thought you were Steve, promoting your blog in the 3rd person.
The fact that you're still here posting suggests that you're not.
I feel really terrible now. We're not all assholes here, promise.

[gdane]

Can anybody direct me to the two easiest prep tests in 29-38? Already did some of them, so 2 options for my final one before the big exam Saturday would be great. Thanks.

Yours is a question with no answer...

My advice is dont even bother taking a PT. Youre not going to magically "get it" by taking one more PT. If you want to keep yourself fresh, drill some sections.

Good luck!

[BackToTheOldHouse]

oops, stalker.

Just thought I would be helpful.

Sorry, I was only a dick because I thought you were Steve, promoting your blog in the 3rd person.
The fact that you're still here posting suggests that you're not.
I feel really terrible now. We're not all assholes here, promise.

No problem. After reading your response, then looking back at my own, I realized that I did sound a lot like a douche trying to push my own blog, so I had it coming.

I am not Steve, but I was really happy to find his blog a few months back, and the link is legit and could save some folks some money. I know I am supposed to just be focusing on Saturday, but I couldn't pass up sharing this with others in my same position.

Cheers

[NYC1010]

Can anybody direct me to the two easiest prep tests in 29-38? Already did some of them, so 2 options for my final one before the big exam Saturday would be great. Thanks.

Yours is a question with no answer...

My advice is dont even bother taking a PT. Youre not going to magically "get it" by taking one more PT. If you want to keep yourself fresh, drill some sections.

Good luck!

Just wanna do 1 more for some added confidence, hence why i'm looking for an easy one... I think i "get it" by now haha.

[r2b2ct]

I decided with PT54 (my last) to try to walk into the saloon already firing away, just sort of haphazardly going through the test and not agonizing over any one problem (my method on tests throughout UG). I set a 90-minute time limit:
RC: -1 LR1: -1 LG: -0 LR2: -2 Overall: -4, 177 but I consider this better than my previous 177+ scores because the others were all done on at least -11 curves

This brings up a dilemma, though - was I really meant to tear through this test and close the booklet with 10 minutes to spare in each section? I've been making consistent progress using my slow-down method to try to get me to carefully consider each choice; should I abandon this entirely to go for something that has worked wonders once, and might just as easily produce a score in the mid-160s when I take 61?

I am a splitter (my 3.71 crumbled to 3.55 when LSDAS ran it through their meat grinder), so I think it might be worth it to go for it, but I know that in the 5 minutes between when I finished and when I started to grade I was sure I'd bombed. For the real thing, I don't know if I could take that for three weeks.

Bah, I envy your dilemma. I took 54 at the library today. I bombed it for a 167. -4 on RC and -3 on each other section, even LG (accidentally didn't read one of the rules on the last game). This is my lowest score in about a month. I felt really confident the whole time and finished each section with tons of time left over. Whats worse is that when reviewing the missed LRs and some RCs it actually took quite a while to understand why the correct response was right...

In your case I honestly think it would be far too risky to try the new method on game day unless you test it more.