Never understood how people finished LG early... Forum

[JurisDoctorate]

I was just doing an LG section and I saw that I had 15 minutes left for my fourth game. It was an awesome feeling to see that my speed has just increased through practice. I ended up taking my sweet time on the fourth, finished 6 minutes early and had a -0 on the section. I have just been doing the Cambridge LSAT LG by Type like crazy and I have improved dramatically. As I kept thinking before the October test, one needs to just get in the LG mindset. You have to immerse yourself and do LG after LG after LG in order to make the necessary mental connections. I'm so glad I finally did it; I've missed 1 question on my last 4 sections and I've missed 2 on my last 25 individual games.

I am going to keep preparing for LG, but I am at the point where I know I'm going to rock the LG and there's no reason I would miss more than 2 on the December test.

Now - if only I can return to the -5 average on RC, then I'll be in business

[DieAntwoord]

I went through REA practice makes perfect Logic games twice. And after that I always finished lg with about 10 mins left.

[paulshortys10]

Thanks for the post....Very encouraging for someone like me who is still lagging with time...

[The Gentleman]

The key, as the OP noted, is repetition. I made a copy of every LG from PT 1 to 60 and did/redid sections until I was consistently missing 0 or 1. (got a perfect on LG in Oct) One great tip I got from these forums was to buy some plastic cover sheets and dry erase markers. That allowed me to redo older sections without spending a bunch of money on extra copies.

Do at least one timed section per day. Games are LSAC's gift to the thoroughly prepared.

[ElvisAaron]

Working for LG perfection as well, for my Dec retake.
Is there any general consensus as to whether its better to drill them byPT LG sections or chunks of games by type?

[ziggie]

Never understood how people finished RC early.. I always finished LG with 3 min left, but had to guess on some RC

[incompetentia]

Working for LG perfection as well, for my Dec retake.
Is there any general consensus as to whether its better to drill them byPT LG sections or chunks of games by type?

I would say doing them by PT is much more useful. If you diagram differently by type, you have to be able to recognize game type when one is plopped down in front of you, and drilling by type doesn't let you do that.

[JurisDoctorate]

I think a combination of both would be best.

While I agree with doing them by PT so you get used to recognizing different types (which is part of what I am doing now), I feel it is of the utmost importance to do them by type (chunks like Cambridge). There is just something to doing the same task over and over and over so you get that feedback and can make adjustments.

Think of it this way: while it is important for a hitter to practice at-bats where the pitcher throws fastballs, curves, sliders and change-ups - it can really be beneficial to face a bunch of curves in a row or a bunch of sliders. When you do this repeated practice by type, you make connections and strides that you only get by constantly facing the problem and make adjustments on the fly.

In layman's terms, I just really feel that by type is a powerful method and has helped me tremendously.

[paulshortys10]

I saw some improvement in the LG section just finished....

Hopefully this transfers to LR and rc, time wise