Top Law Schools

Specifically for L/R, would you say one is more superior than the other with respect to particular aspects?

I'm curious about this as well...what are the differences like between the LRs and LGs?

I can only comment on Manhattan for LG.

PS is like a long, boring math lecture.
Manhattan is like the smart kid in class giving you the quick and dirty on how to get the answer.

Personally, after many hours of study with the PS methods (because it came so highly recommended on TLS), I found Manhattan to be simple and powerful. PS is wordy and overly complex by comparison, although their drills and slower pace may be better suited for those testing closer to median or otherwise new to prep.

From what I've gathered, the PS Bibles are good for learning the basics, but Manhattan overall has a better strategy (although from the samples I've read it is hard to follow if you don't have a grasp of the basics already - LGB does an amazing job doing that).

Unfortunately I didn't realize how useful Manhattan would be until I started looking at their forums. I am taking the test in October, and as I've already read through the bibles/taken many practice tests, so I can't afford to spend time going through their ~500 page LR book. In retrospect though, I would definitely read PS for the basics and then get Manhattan for more "effective" strategies than PS suggests.

FacePalm wrote:I can only comment on Manhattan for LG.

PS is like a long, boring math lecture.
Manhattan is like the smart kid in class giving you the quick and dirty on how to get the answer.

Personally, after many hours of study with the PS methods (because it came so highly recommended on TLS), I found Manhattan to be simple and powerful. PS is wordy and overly complex by comparison, although their drills and slower pace may be better suited for those testing closer to median or otherwise new to prep.

Credited. PS just simply is not as good for LG. Manhattan does a much better job of getting you comfortable with setting up frames and thinking through different games so when you get one that doesn't perfectly fit into a category you've learned you won't freeze up and shut down. The manhattan LG book took me from missing many LG questions per section to only missing about 1 per section within the 35 minutes.

Can't comment about LR though.

From what I hear it works somewhat like this...

If you're looking to get 165-170, or you're starting from scratch, the Bibles are great (RC bible not included). If you're looking to get 171+, Manhattan is the way to go. I think it's more targeted toward high end test-takers rather than the general populace. I could be wrong though. I went through the LR and LG bibles, and going through them again (need to wait to get paid to get the Manhattan stuff), and they're solid, but I don't think they're perfect.

This was sort of hinted at above, but I thought it was worth highlighting:

If you don't know much about the LSAT and you start with the Manhattan books, you may find them occasionally hard to follow. I had already done a good bit of studying (Kaplan and then PS) before checking out Manhattan, but there were a handful of times when I was reading through their methods or explanations and I thought to myself, "Okay, I see what they're saying here, but there's some subtext missing and I might not have fully grasped this if I didn't have the basics down already."

With that said, I agree that their methods are, for the most part, more sophisticated and useful.

IMO, M>>>PSB, for the reasons given above.

Yeah, PS seems to only give you the basics. For example, PS just tells you about defender/supporter in the necessary assumption questions, but Manhattan dedicates a substantial amount of time to the assumption family. They really ingrain their "core" into you, and they force you to see the gaps in arguments. However, I think that powerscore has the best formal logic explanation of any company.

So, is it a good idea to use both? I'm working with only Powerscore at the moment because I needed the foundation. Once I have that foundation, should I move on to Manhattan? I'm aiming for the 170's. I ask because this --

NoodleyOne wrote:If you're looking to get 165-170, or you're starting from scratch, the Bibles are great (RC bible not included). If you're looking to get 171+, Manhattan is the way to go.

-- gives me pause. TLS taught me that PS was the way to go, but an aspiring splitter can't bottom out in the high 160's...

North wrote:So, is it a good idea to use both? I'm working with only Powerscore at the moment because I needed the foundation. Once I have that foundation, should I move on to Manhattan? I'm aiming for the 170's. I ask because this --

NoodleyOne wrote:If you're looking to get 165-170, or you're starting from scratch, the Bibles are great (RC bible not included). If you're looking to get 171+, Manhattan is the way to go.

-- gives me pause. TLS taught me that PS was the way to go, but an aspiring splitter can't bottom out in the high 160's...

Personally, I got a lot out of M after reading the PSBs, and I would recommend reading them after youve been through the PSBs.

(Manhattan Bundle)

Nova wrote:Personally, I got a lot out of M after reading the PSBs, and I would recommend reading them after youve been through the PSBs.

To be sure, Manhattan LG and LR are both credited? About to spend some dollas.

Get dat bundle

mcs268 wrote:From what I've gathered, the PS Bibles are good for learning the basics, but Manhattan overall has a better strategy (although from the samples I've read it is hard to follow if you don't have a grasp of the basics already - LGB does an amazing job doing that).

Unfortunately I didn't realize how useful Manhattan would be until I started looking at their forums. I am taking the test in October, and as I've already read through the bibles/taken many practice tests, so I can't afford to spend time going through their ~500 page LR book. In retrospect though, I would definitely read PS for the basics and then get Manhattan for more "effective" strategies than PS suggests.

This. I think Powerscore is important if you're still trying to build the base of understanding the test, but Manhattan takes you over the top. Manhattan is best for people looking to score in the 170s, but if your not to the point where this is possible, you really ought to start with Powerscore.

Read the top review here
I wrote it several months ago

I did the PS books for the June test shooting for 172, only hit 168 and am retaking in October with Manhattan. I'm finishing up the assumption family chapters in MLR right now and so far it seems to be clicking much better than PS. Oscar mentioned that they really ingrain the "core" strategy into you, which I think is really helpful. I've taken several UG courses on formal logic and after the PS bibles I thought I had a pretty good handle on the basic relationship between premises and conclusions, but what I didn't realize was that a lot of the time I'd be taking "background information" as additional premises of the argument when they're not relevant. At least for me, the MLR strategy makes seeing through the bullshit parts of a stimulus and getting to the premises that actually matter much easier. It seems simple, but if the rest of the book is this helpful I def recommend MLR.

Nice. Thanks for the answers, they were exactly what I was looking for. Ordered the Manhattan L/G guide yesterday through Ebay for $35 incl. shipping, hoping to get that by this week. I'll probably order the L/R one as well.. in retrospect I'm not sure why I didn't just order both yesterday :/ oh well.

.

.

What is your opinion on the Manhattan RC Book? How do you think it compares to Powerscore's RCB? What do you think is better?

JamMasterJ wrote:

mcs268 wrote:From what I've gathered, the PS Bibles are good for learning the basics, but Manhattan overall has a better strategy (although from the samples I've read it is hard to follow if you don't have a grasp of the basics already - LGB does an amazing job doing that).

Unfortunately I didn't realize how useful Manhattan would be until I started looking at their forums. I am taking the test in October, and as I've already read through the bibles/taken many practice tests, so I can't afford to spend time going through their ~500 page LR book. In retrospect though, I would definitely read PS for the basics and then get Manhattan for more "effective" strategies than PS suggests.

This. I think Powerscore is important if you're still trying to build the base of understanding the test, but Manhattan takes you over the top. Manhattan is best for people looking to score in the 170s, but if your not to the point where this is possible, you really ought to start with Powerscore.

Read the top review here
I wrote it several months ago

Can anyone tell me if Manhattan uses REAL LSAT questions for all 3 books?? I just want to make sure there are no fakes.

MissJenna wrote:Can anyone tell me if Manhattan uses REAL LSAT questions for all 3 books?? I just want to make sure there are no fakes.

Yes, it does.

I used Powerscore for logic reasoning and i personally felt as though it was way to wordy and technical. I've been studying logic reasoning using Manhattan now and it is MUCH, MUCH better!

For LG I used PowerScore in combination with ACE the LSAT Logic Games. The second book is basically a bunch of LG practice tests, but are mostly NOT taken from the LSAT. However, the book is a great price and the exercises are very similar to those found on the LSAT. You get a ton of practice for not a lot of money. Now I am getting perfect on ever single LSAT LG - partially because of practice, and partially because of the awesome diagramming techniques of PowerScore. I didn't use the Manhattan LG Book.

Now for LR I have both PowerScore and Manhattan and Manhattan is much much better than PowerScore. After studying the LR Bible I was still getting about -5 and -4 in every practice test on LR. After studying Manhattan LR I have been consistently getting -1 and occasionally -2 on my LR sections. I'm still struggling to get a perfect, but I'm much closer to it. I find that the way Manhattan explains and groups the question types is simpler, easier to follow and more effective. PowerScore has this complicated technique of grouping the question types that's harder to follow.

So my advice...for LG definitely use the PowerScore Bible, for LR use Manhattan.

Nova wrote:

MissJenna wrote:Can anyone tell me if Manhattan uses REAL LSAT questions for all 3 books?? I just want to make sure there are no fakes.

Yes, it does.

Thanks.

I just purchased the set........so expensive!!! Hope it's worth it!!!!

MissJenna wrote:What is your opinion on the Manhattan RC Book? How do you think it compares to Powerscore's RCB? What do you think is better?

JamMasterJ wrote:

mcs268 wrote:From what I've gathered, the PS Bibles are good for learning the basics, but Manhattan overall has a better strategy (although from the samples I've read it is hard to follow if you don't have a grasp of the basics already - LGB does an amazing job doing that).

Unfortunately I didn't realize how useful Manhattan would be until I started looking at their forums. I am taking the test in October, and as I've already read through the bibles/taken many practice tests, so I can't afford to spend time going through their ~500 page LR book. In retrospect though, I would definitely read PS for the basics and then get Manhattan for more "effective" strategies than PS suggests.

This. I think Powerscore is important if you're still trying to build the base of understanding the test, but Manhattan takes you over the top. Manhattan is best for people looking to score in the 170s, but if your not to the point where this is possible, you really ought to start with Powerscore.

Read the top review here
I wrote it several months ago

there's no such thing as a really effective RC book, but it's the closest thing I've seen/heard of