Top Law Schools

Anyone else think that the time is best served just drawing out hypos the whole time? Haha...jesus that was a killer.

gspiel1232 wrote:Anyone else think that the time is best served just drawing out hypos the whole time? Haha...jesus that was a killer.

Good God stained glass absolutely slaughtered what would have been an amazing score for me.

On that note, I have no freaking idea how the time would best be served, except figuring out all of the other problem sets first and then praying you get lucky filling in random bubbles.

There's a key inference that makes it a lot easier. If Y->P, and if -P->-Y. With that in mind, you know that P has to be in at least two groups (one with GP and one with YP (remember Y can't be with G)), and that either P or O has to be in each group. From there, it's not really too terribly bad.

Ah yeah you're totally right.

Note to self: See two or more rules with one variable in a grouping game....LOOK CLOSELY..(major inference/frames)

thanks for that tidbit

"If not X, then Y" rules I write down as "Must have X OR Y", did the same for that last rule.

I think if I was a natural at LG I would hit the global MBT inference questions right off the bat. The work done for those applies to your setup as a whole so theoretically they're the most useful questions (Unfortunately, they take me the longest to answer). Stained glass has one too, #12, though if you are doing the problems in order its probably not as valuable to you by then

Just had this today actually.

When it got to those "Could be a complete selection"

I started off with all options have to have either O, P, or OP in them. So I crossed those off.

Then I set up the R R _ diagram and used the most constricting rule (Y --> no O/G) and plugged and chugged from there.

It took a long time (12 minutes I think; albeit I spent 3 minutes fooling around because I didn't have an attack plan) but games 1, 3 and 4 were so easy I finished in time.