First ~30 PrepTests vs. Newer Tests Forum

[DWinter18]

Hey all,

I thought I remembered reading that there are some noticeable differences and trends in the newer tests vs. the older PrepTests. I ask because I'm studying hardcore for the October Test, and I've been using mostly older tests (the ones found in the 3 "Official 10 LSATs" books). These tests do not have any comparative reading comp. sections, so that is one big difference. I also think Reading Comp. overall on these tests is, for the most part, extremely easy. Games aren't too bad at all. My only troublesome area is LR but I've been drilling that extremely hard and I've seen a lot of improvement.

I plan on buying a bunch of the most recent tests so I can use those for full PT when it gets to August and September, but I was just wondering if there are any noticeable differences. Thanks in advance!

[soj]

Comp reading is the big change. LG has fluctuated in difficulty, but in general, test writers seem to be sticking with the main game types (no weird ones like in PT1-20), though they're more willing now to make hybrid ones that have elements of different game types. There's also a new LG question type that is very recent; you'll encounter it in PT 57 or later and immediately know what I mean.

[ShulmanSR]

Comp reading is the big change. LG has fluctuated in difficulty, but in general, test writers seem to be sticking with the main game types (no weird ones like in PT1-20), though they're more willing now to make hybrid ones that have elements of different game types. There's also a new LG question type that is very recent; you'll encounter it in PT 57 or later and immediately know what I mean.

Which type of game is this?

[Sloth Hero]

Question: All of these rules would make the previous questions unsolveable, EXCEPT:

Lol JK that doesn't exist.

[soj]

Which type of game is this?

It can be any game type. The question asks something like this: the conditions of the game are unchanged if the rule that states "X must come before Y" is replaced with which one of the following? Basically, it's asking for an equivalent rule.

[KevinP]

Question: All of these rules would make the previous questions unsolveable, EXCEPT:

Lol JK that doesn't exist.

I loled. That question would probably be time consuming as hell.


@OP:
RC: Older RC was easier, newer RC has a comparative passage and has gotten noticeably harder.
LG: Older LGs, especially those in the 30s, were much harder and sometimes unpredictable. The newer LGs are easier in comparison but LG has been making a slight comeback in the last couple of test.
LR: Stimulus is shorter on newer pretests. No more 2-question stimulus on newer tests. I wouldn't classify the newer LR as harder, just different.

[Perdevise]

Comp reading is the big change. LG has fluctuated in difficulty, but in general, test writers seem to be sticking with the main game types (no weird ones like in PT1-20), though they're more willing now to make hybrid ones that have elements of different game types. There's also a new LG question type that is very recent; you'll encounter it in PT 57 or later and immediately know what I mean.

I know exactly what you are talking about (if you mean the rule substitution question). Be sure to focus on those questions on PTs, because they are very challenging and the Bibles have no references for dealing with them.

Anyway, yes, the Logic Games from 1 to (I would say) 30 are radically different from what is common today. LR and RC are completely worthwhile; while prepping, I used LR and RC sections from Next Ten as fifth 'experimental' sections instead of chopping up valuable, recent PTs. But I think using the logic games would be a waste of time and thought.

[glucose101]

Now that the LR is shorter, is this good or bad? Haha.

[Sloth Hero]

But if you want to effectively extract as much knowledge as you can from 1-30, go ahead and do them ASAP, and then do your Virgin recents afterwards.

[Perdevise]

But if you want to effectively extract as much knowledge as you can from 1-30, go ahead and do them ASAP, and then do your Virgin recents afterwards.

In retrospect, I think you may be right - it certainly can't hurt to do them, and having experience in seeing radically weird LGs may be useful. I guess I would moderate my previous statement and say, if you have the time to do them, and want to, go ahead, but realize you won't see anything like that on the test.