Page 1 of 1

.

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:46 am
by jd20132013
.

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:56 am
by JazzOne
Just put the letters in order.

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:56 am
by justadude55
JazzOne wrote:Just put the letters in order.
+1

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:00 am
by paulshortys10
atlas tree method is extremely easy to learn and use

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:01 am
by JazzOne
paulshortys10 wrote:atlas tree method is extremely easy to learn and use
I'm a big fan of the tree method myself. Oh wait, that's something different.

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 3:47 am
by Rawlberto
Depends. "Pure" sequencing games it's better to use a branching tree, for linear sequence its best to do a ranking set.

Also, Kaplan is awful.

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:28 am
by skip james
Rawlberto wrote:Depends. "Pure" sequencing games it's better to use a branching tree, for linear sequence its best to do a ranking set.

Also, Kaplan is awful.
That's sorta funny that you say that those two paragraphs together, since (back in the day, i.e. 'pre-atlas'), kaplan was the one staunch advocate of the tree diagram (that I could find anyhow, and I did a lot of searching) and helped me basically filling in one of the biggest gaps that powerscore left for me (aside from matching/attribute games, but that's another story). I didn't take their course or anything, but I do recommend glancing at their logic games workbook at borders, while drinking a coffee and reading their chapter on 'loose sequencing', as they call it, I think.

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:46 am
by Rawlberto
I will concede that the one of the good thing I got out of Kaplan (besides the mastery books) was the tree/branch diagram. Their system for everything else is awful though. I was stuck at 150s using their techniques until I said "screw it, I threw a bunch of money away on something that doesn't work." Picked up the bibles, used their techniques, and still really regret having spent money on a Kaplan course.

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 5:01 am
by skip james
Rawlberto wrote:I will concede that the one of the good thing I got out of Kaplan (besides the mastery books) was the tree/branch diagram. Their system for everything else is awful though. I was stuck at 150s using their techniques until I said "screw it, I threw a bunch of money away on something that doesn't work." Picked up the bibles, used their techniques, and still really regret having spent money on a Kaplan course.
Meh, I still think they're overrated. They sorta suck on grouping games, and hybrid type games. I didn't much like their circular linear game strategy either (though it's really not a real issue in modern day tests).

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:49 am
by kpuc
What's the Tree method?

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:07 am
by kkklick
With the tree method I can solve a game in about 5 minutes with 100% accuracy everytime.

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:11 am
by sophia.olive
The Evergreen tree method works for both the june and december tests.....

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:05 pm
by JazzOne
sophia.olive wrote:The Evergreen tree method works for both the june and december tests.....
lol

Re: Better approach for sequencing games and why?

Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:25 pm
by Manhattan LSAT Noah
kpuc wrote:What's the Tree method?
It's pretty easy to learn this approach. Download the first chapter of our LG book (free download from our site's store) and it's explained there. There's also a recorded lesson. PM me and I'll shoot you the link.