paulshortys10 wrote:So i took many timed and untimed pt's(bout 35), yet i neglected the timing aspect of it. I did not improve in my timing (as i have mentioned in past post). My scores have been very inconsistent from a high of 165 to a low of 159. my scores in individual sections have also been very inconsistent. I'm scared I'm not going to be able to finish sections and have to guess on many answers. I'm scared I'll get stuck on 1 hard Logic game or 1 hard passage. Yet I'm optimistic if everything flows well, and I'm at 100% focus, i'll be able to pull it off and get above a 162. I know it's not recommended, but Imma take my final PT 61 tomorrow (friday), and continue practicing my timing today(doing many LR and RC) and doing many LG's to make sure I'm perfect on test day. I feel I can't relax at this point and need to use this time to work on this.
BTW anyone have a suggestion on how to quickly attack the new question on LG( if you take out this rule and replace it with which of the following does it make the same result).
Lol, my range is 12 points in the last two weeks, you're differential is half mine. That's consistent. Sounds like you can rely on landing in that range.
The new question... I had never noticed that that type was new. I see what you are saying. I usually don't do a new diagram. The three times I remember seeing it, two of the times it was something like this (making this up off the top of my head).
You have a global rule at the beginning that says something like "G and K must occur consecutively." Then you have another rule that says "H must occur at some point after K."
So you yield the rule (this is supposed to be one rule, even though it looks split up because of ascii use...):
_____
| GK |
_____
| KG |
And you get the rule
K > H
Now combine them (and sorry for the rudimentary ascii art):
_____
| GK |
_____ > H
| KG |
Now usually what I've seen is, the question will say something like "What rule could be substituted for the rule that H must occur at some point after K and still yield the same results."
And there will be an answer that refers to G occuring at some point before H, and that will be your right answer. If you tie all the pieces together at the beginning, you will quickly see that H comes after G and K and that it doesn't matter which it comes after because G and K are connected at the hips (regardless of the order).
Now PT61 had one on the last game that wasn't quite that straightforward. Q11. Here is a picture for my setup for that, which isn't very helpful by itself...
You'll notice that I put little circles around the group of N, T, and J, and around H and P. Everyone has their own little individualized notation quirks. I did this when I hit 11. P was not connected to anything in that chain because it was a random as far as that chain goes; its rule couldn't be integrated into that chain. But I wanted to show put it there anyway, because its random nature within that chain is useful to know in and of itself.
When I saw answer choice D, it was obvious immediately, because I set my chain up that way, that replacing it with D would have satisfied the conditions of the question. How do I know this quickly? I circled the N J and T group to visually remind myself that that was the rule I was seeking to replace. I saw that H and P were not connected to that chain but everything else was. Voila. That question took about 30 seconds (another note... I usually skim every answer very quickly to find the obvious one that sticks out in case there is one, rather than carefully evaluating each answer one at a time).
The key is having a strong front-loaded setup (I usually spend most of the time in the setup as opposed to the questions). There isn't any other way around it. If your setup isn't strong, you will have to diagram everything all over again.
.....
!