Top Law Schools

Something that doesn't take up copious amount of time. Oh, and something else other than "save these questions for last!" kinda advice!

These questions have appeared on every PT, PT 56 onwards. So it's a safe bet to say that we'll have at least one of these types on the June 2011 LG.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=4011549

Well, mainly http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=137711

scroll down to rule equivalency bonus chapter...http://www.manhattanlsat.com/training-center.cfm

I know this isn't what you're looking for, but unless you're pulling 90% or higher on the LG sections, then skip these questions. It's far better to skip a few questions in the section and to spread that time among the other game setups and questions than it is to try to stretch yourself to hit every single question and end up making "stupid mistakes" elsewhere because you're so rushed.

A good LSAT test taker knows the value of strategic skips, and these questions are perfect candidates.

I'm a dork and thought you were talking about the questions that change an existing rule and want you to figure out what happens, as opposed to the ones that want a new rule but the same outcome (which people hate more but are, ironically, often faster if you know what you're doing). For these questions, you really just need to think about what the old rule does. Usually you can get away with just thinking directly about what the entities/slots in the old rule can do, and then you just find a rule in the answer choices that mimics that. Basically be predictive. Do these last (obviously), and get a quick sense of what the rule in question has done in various other sketches. They pick rules that only have a few possibilities (often only 2) for a particular entity or slot. Your new rule just has to get those possibilities across, and the answer is often really obvious about it, thankfully.

KDLMaj wrote:I know this isn't what you're looking for, but unless you're pulling 90% or higher on the LG sections, then skip these questions. It's far better to skip a few questions in the section and to spread that time among the other game setups and questions than it is to try to stretch yourself to hit every single question and end up making "stupid mistakes" elsewhere because you're so rushed.

A good LSAT test taker knows the value of strategic skips, and these questions are perfect candidates.

If you can't answer every question you are stupid. HTH

tomwatts wrote:http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=4011549

Well, mainly http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=137711

^^^This is correct. Read Tom's post in the second thread above. It helped me on the real thing. All of these questions are basically only testing a couple of different things and he explains it well.

KDLMaj wrote:I know this isn't what you're looking for, but unless you're pulling 90% or higher on the LG sections, then skip these questions. It's far better to skip a few questions in the section and to spread that time among the other game setups and questions than it is to try to stretch yourself to hit every single question and end up making "stupid mistakes" elsewhere because you're so rushed.

A good LSAT test taker knows the value of strategic skips, and these questions are perfect candidates.

They're just new questions so they seem confusing but from what I've seen they're no more difficult or time consuming than any other question type. If you have a good sense of how the rule that is being substituted has driven the game you can usually spot an answer choice that seems right, test it real quick and be done in the same amount of time as any other question.

These questions always appear last so you've had the opportunity to pinpoint all the major moving parts of the game by that point which is a huge advantage to attacking this question type. I wouldn't skip it unless it's really giving you problems.

I don't know how helpful my reply will be since the logic games have always come naturally to me (I typically get -0 or -1 at most)... but the new type of question did throw me for a loop the first time I saw it. I was able to figure it out after the second PT I saw it on and now I think it's a really easy type of question.

Basically, it made it easier for me to think of it like this: What's another way of saying this rule? - Same rule, same exact results, just a different way of phrasing it. Usually another rule factors in to the new way of saying it.

For instance, you have two rules:

A must go at the same time as B (AB)
A must go earlier than C (A --> C) - I always interpret and diagram a rule like this as meaning (AB --> C)

Question: What, if substituted for the rule that A must go earlier than C, would have the same effect in determining the order of the letters?

Well, I've already diagrammed this - since A always has to go at the same time as B and we want something that gives us the exact same result as the original rule, the new rule would either be:

B must go earlier than C -OR- C must go later than B

Since A and B are always together, that would still give us the results of A going earlier than C (AB --> C)