manhattan binary Forum

[wanderlust]

the bible's diagram does not help me much in binary games
although people on this board recommended manhattan, i'm still a bit suspicious of their arrow method.
especially if there are large number of variables to be grouped. wouldn't the arrows cluster together and render visual confusion?

[richie222]

once you get used to doing it under timed conditions i think it is extremely helpful, and once you have the diagram made and know how to read it correctly you basically have the game solved. it does get kind of messy, but with practice its not hard at all to read through.

[Strange]

I think it depends. I just went through Manhattan's binary section last night, and I'm someone who's been using the Bible's methods since April and have been scoring -1's consistently (and scored -1 in June). I never found the binary games difficult and I think trying to make the logic chain would only confuse me because of how messy my writing is. But everyone is different

[99.9luft]

the bible's diagram does not help me much in binary games
although people on this board recommended manhattan, i'm still a bit suspicious of their arrow method.
especially if there are large number of variables to be grouped. wouldn't the arrows cluster together and render visual confusion?

It's good for those not exposed to other methods previously. I prefer to do logical chains instead of the Manhattan method when it comes to binary (or in/out games) because it is something i was used and could not adopt the "madman's sketch" method of Manhattan. This method is probably the only thing i dislike about Manhattan. Otherwise, a great company, nuanced methodology, and great instructors.

[moopness]

I tried my hand at their binary method last night (in full disclosure, I do not have their LG guide and just gleaned some diagrams they posted to learn their method). On certain games, like the birds in a forest one, their method I feel is superior to PS's. On others, such as the rubies, sapphires and topaz game, I feel it is not only inferior but a waste of time and very confusing. Obviously this is a personal call, but you should try it out a few times as it may click better for you.

[KevinP]

I've experimented with several methods and I've found Manhattan's method works rather well on undefined grouping games whereas it can be a bit tedious on other types of binary games especially ones where numerical distributions play a major role. Moreover, since I'm a sloppy writer, my diagram using Manhattan's method looks like a 2nd grader drew it.

That said, I've been messing with LSAT blog's chain method and I'm currently finding it to be the best overall method for in/out games.

I think the chain method allows one to automatically see crucial inferences. Of course the following rules can be generalized to any in/out method.
"Anytime we have a positive variable followed by a negative variable, at least one of those two variables is out. (Maybe both are out.)"
"Anytime we have a negative variable followed by a positive variable, at least one of those two variables is in. (Maybe both are in.)"
http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/lo ... orest.html

[glucose101]

I think it's just best to know the many ways of how to diagram various situations so you have options on game day. Like the gem game, I don't think the BEST and most efficient way to diagram this game would be through MLSAT's binary method, although it works incredibly for some other games. But going into that game, I knew it wouldn't.

The games aren't a one-size fit all. Be flexible.