Logic Games Set Up - Which Method Do You Prefer?

[z0rk]

Hey All,

So I am retaking the LSAT in June after performing miserably on the December LSAT (I scored at my diagnostic, not my practice test score). After taking a little break I returned to the exam and my coursework notes from Princeton Review to examine where I can improve. One area that I have trouble with are complex logic games (surprising). A long time ago, before taking Princeton Review, I actually took a PowerScore course my senior year of college. A good deal of time elapsed between when I took powerscore and princeton review, and so when I returned to studying with princeton review I took no issue learning their methods.

I am now reviewing the LG bible and I am finding myself in conflict with two sets of testing habits. Princeton Review utilizes a table/grid method for diagramming work on LG whereas the bible swears that utilizing a grid is a set up for disaster on complex non-linear games. I've searched the forum, and from what I have found most folks have proffered "do what works best for you" as advice. I absolutely agree; however, I am hoping for a some additional input. Complex games like the Mauve Dinosaur (In/Out) or Stained Glass (?? I forget what type of game this is) could probably benefit from different types of set ups. Which ones do you feel work best for the complex linear and non-linear games?

constructive input is much appreciated.

Thanks

[damage-inc]

hard to say exactly which is the best method but I had great success with Powerscore and the methods they teach.

My friend showed me the kaplan way, which was a grid system so I'm guessing its similar to PR, and it looked horrible to me. Plus it looked extremely time consuming.

Thus...powerscore ftw

[glucose101]

While I've never used PR's grid-method, after using Powerscore, I don't know how else one could organize the problems more efficiently. This isn't to say that the PR method does not work; it might work better for you. However, I think Powerscore is definitely on to something.

[cubswin]

You wouldnt use a grid for TPR on the dinos game. You would have a column for selected and one for not selected, and thats about it. Unless you consider that a grid.

[EarlCat]

I use the grid on almost all games. T-chart for in/out, and "rubber bands" for ranking/loose-sequencing games.

[z0rk]

I use the grid on almost all games. T-chart for in/out, and "rubber bands" for ranking/loose-sequencing games.

This is closest to PR. What are rubber bands?

I run into a few issues with both methods, and perhaps its more about focusing on my skills as opposed to diagramming.

[suzige]

blueprint/powerscore worked wonders for me. Easy to learn. Never attempted a princeton review grid... looked at one. yikes.

[tomwatts]

I use the Princeton Review grid for everything. It always works for everything (except pure map games, and it's been close to a decade since the last one of those). The only difference is what the header is.

I despise drawing a new set of slots for each question; it's more time-consuming (albeit not much), and it makes it harder to look back at previous work for questions that ask about possibilities in general (as opposed to, "If some stuff happened, then what could be true?") — this being a crucial part of the PR approach to such "General" questions, I think it's rather worth keeping.

Any games diagramming method that is not what you're used to is going to look "complicated," so that doesn't really factor into it. They're all representing the same information at the same level of detail, for the most part.

[jim-green]

Where can I get help with or the diagram for P7 G3?