Top Law Schools

I've read a lot of posts on how LGs are a little less difficult whereas RC somewhat picks up in terms of its denseness. When does this kick in? Is it true that LGs become a little more "standardized"? I noticed that there was this weird mapping game on PT 40, and I'm worried that I'll run into these again on the actual test.

I just completed PT 40 (171), and haven't really noticed LG getting any easier in light of the past few PTs I've taken. (I"ve taken PT 1-40, PT A, B, and C). Can anyone please shed some light on this?? Much appreciated:D

Do you know what date PT 40 was administered?

From what I remember, some of the older LGs could come out of left field occasionally and someone who usually scores 18-19/21 could end up with a 12. But for the last 2 years I'd say, they're much more predictable.

yeah, I'm a little ahead of you going through the PTs. I'm just doing the tests in the forties. I'm finding games to be more standard and easier overall, but RC is making me cry. I never scored as low on RC as I did on the last couple PTs I took.

BigA wrote:yeah, I'm a little ahead of you going through the PTs. I'm just doing the tests in the forties. I'm finding games to be more standard and easier overall, but RC is making me cry. I never scored as low on RC as I did on the last couple PTs I took.

YES.... RC makes me want to cry...... my last PT looked like this:

PT 40

LR - 1
LR -1
LG - 2
RC - a fucking 5!!!!

I'm thinking about re-evaluating my reading comprehension strategy... but I'm also thinking that it might be possible for me to get used seeing denser passages. I believe PT 40 is in 2003. I think I'll have to get -0 on LG, -2 on LR overall, and -5 on RC on the actual test to get the score range that I want. Hopefully this isn't too far of a stretch...

I chopped up all the PTs up to 49 and used them for practice, then started taking full-length PTs with PT 50. I've done 50 and 51 and have gotten -0 and -1 on games. There are still some individual games from earlier tests that kick my ass, so I was worried that games would be my weak point on this final push to June 7, but I've been pleasantly surprised by the difficulty levels of games in the 50s so far. I think 50 and 51 were both from 2006.

shoop wrote:I chopped up all the PTs up to 49 and used them for practice, then started taking full-length PTs with PT 50. I've done 50 and 51 and have gotten -0 and -1 on games. There are still some individual games from earlier tests that kick my ass, so I was worried that games would be my weak point on this final push to June 7, but I've been pleasantly surprised by the difficulty levels of games in the 50s so far. I think 50 and 51 were both from 2006.

This is how I see it: When it comes to the gimme games on an LG section, I try to finish that game within six minutes, and then spend a good 9 minutes on the more difficult ones. The games in the 30s made that plan virtually impossible for me. So just to get some closure, would it be safe to say that there are some 6-minute games in the LG sections in the 50s?

PLATONiC wrote:

shoop wrote:I chopped up all the PTs up to 49 and used them for practice, then started taking full-length PTs with PT 50. I've done 50 and 51 and have gotten -0 and -1 on games. There are still some individual games from earlier tests that kick my ass, so I was worried that games would be my weak point on this final push to June 7, but I've been pleasantly surprised by the difficulty levels of games in the 50s so far. I think 50 and 51 were both from 2006.

This is how I see it: When it comes to the gimme games on an LG section, I try to finish that game within six minutes, and then spend a good 9 minutes on the more difficult ones. The games in the 30s made that plan virtually impossible for me. So just to get some closure, would it be safe to say that there are some 6-minute games in the LG sections in the 50s?

There was a 6-minute game on the Sep09 LSAT.