The only major thing I was able to infer was that out of the Topazes, there could be anywhere from 2-3 selected and I represented this by w/z __ (__). What else was I missing here?

I got that there would be either 2-3 topazes, but didn't even think to make this diagram. Did you just make that when you were diagramming the other rules? I also took just over 15 min and spent way too long on 14, which your diagram solves immediately.LSAT Blog wrote: R-S-T
1-3-2
3-1-2
3-0-3
0-3-3
1-2-3
2-1-3
This is the key inference for the game and should make the questions much easier.
Glad to help, spets!spets wrote:Thanks LSAT Blog. When I ran through the different possibilities, I assumed that there were simply too many for them to be useful (I'm used to numerical distributions simplifying a game into 2-3 possibilities), but now I can see how listing them would have definitely helped me finish in a more timely fashion. I'm glad to hear I wasn't blindsided by a huge inference.
Big fan of your blog and your contributions. Keep up the great work!
I'd create it after laying out the other rules. One indication that distribution plays a role in this game is that many questions/choices refer to the categories of variables (R, S, T), rather than the variables themselves (the specific stones).2011Law wrote:I got that there would be either 2-3 topazes, but didn't even think to make this diagram. Did you just make that when you were diagramming the other rules? I also took just over 15 min and spent way too long on 14, which your diagram solves immediately.
Want to continue reading?
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login