Top Law Schools

Although its quite close to the test day, I just decided to give this exam a try, since it is one of the few 'fresh' exams that are left for me to take.
Long story short, I bombed it: 160 and I cant blame burnout.
With the past three PTs being 179,171,179 (pt 45,63,55, respectively) the Feb 1997 exam came across as a major shock.
Pattern recognition techniques did not help, and even upon review, a significant number of LR question stimulus, stem, and TCR were so strange and ...weird...that they were almost laughable.
RC was hard esp the last two passages, yet the sense of difficulty I got was quite different from the difficulty attributed to the modern RC passages (noguchi, talk story, riddle basins..etc).
LG was tough but it was a good practice minus one game.
Just wanted to share my experience with this exam, and although most ppl would take the actual LSAT without even knowing about the existence of this stolen exam, I would like to know what those of you who had the chance to encounter this beast thought about it.

Thanks ~

My PT average is a 165 (I score anywhere from 164-174 on a really good day) and my score for this test was a 164 about 2 months ago. The LR was definitely brutal for me at the time.

SuperPrep's tests are ridiculously hard and unlike anything you will see on the exam in many ways. Relax. You'll be fine.

JamMasterJ wrote:SuperPrep's tests are ridiculously hard and unlike anything you will see on the exam in many ways. Relax. You'll be fine.

My tutor actually said the SuperPrep tests are super easy and are not indicative of the actual test.

*shrugs*

Your tutor must have been smoking some good stuff when they did all the super prep LG's then

vegso wrote:Your tutor must have been smoking some good stuff when they did all the super prep LG's then

I remember my first time writing PT B when I was sick and getting 144. Considering I got 156 on PT A a few days prior I can only assume it was pretty damn difficult.

JamMasterJ wrote:SuperPrep's tests are ridiculously hard and unlike anything you will see on the exam in many ways. Relax. You'll be fine.

+1

JamMasterJ wrote:SuperPrep's tests are ridiculously hard and unlike anything you will see on the exam in many ways. Relax. You'll be fine.

Really? I did A and B as an 8 section and got 166 or so (which was expected as it was my fourth of the week or something) and C a few days later at a 171; my highest score ever (and I got -7 on lg which was my worst score ever).

I agree LG has gotten easier, but I found LR and RC from earlier tests a lot more direct and easy to solve.

I actually felt the opposite about the super preps, hit my first 170s on them, was a long time ago though, over a year now. Hmm migh take them again now so I can compare them to the recent tests. They felt easier minus the RC op mentioned. Noguchi was particularly brutal for me

what's a superprep?

I think I kicked some ass on one of the Superpreps but the other two were not so easy. The point its, they are nothing like what you will encounter on testday.

Everyone should at least try to go through the LG guantlet that is SuperPrep. I feel that if you can -0 or -1 on these then you truly have mastered the section.

timeless wrote:Although its quite close to the test day, I just decided to give this exam a try, since it is one of the few 'fresh' exams that are left for me to take.
Long story short, I bombed it: 160 and I cant blame burnout.
With the past three PTs being 179,171,179 (pt 45,63,55, respectively) the Feb 1997 exam came across as a major shock.
Pattern recognition techniques did not help, and even upon review, a significant number of LR question stimulus, stem, and TCR were so strange and ...weird...that they were almost laughable.
RC was hard esp the last two passages, yet the sense of difficulty I got was quite different from the difficulty attributed to the modern RC passages (noguchi, talk story, riddle basins..etc).
LG was tough but it was a good practice minus one game.
Just wanted to share my experience with this exam, and although most ppl would take the actual LSAT without even knowing about the existence of this stolen exam, I would like to know what those of you who had the chance to encounter this beast thought about it.

Thanks ~

Your analysis seems spot on with my experience. I found the LR to laughable and practically useless in terms of prepping unless you enjoy brainteasers. LG was decent practice, but obviously Game 3 was more of a brainteaser than a typical game. RC's difficulty was very different from that of recent tests.

I actually still need to re-do the Superprep LG's, but at this point its probably not worth my time considering how different they are (damn ziggurat game)

Why is this the "stolen exam"?

Has anyone taken Super Prep B? I found the first LR to be of some difficulty, and the second LR to be quite easy. RC, I thought, was the easiest I have ever taken. LG seemed challenging, but not impossible. Yet the curve was -15 for 170 and -9 for 175. I very much want to take my score seriously, but I am having a bit of a hard time doing so.

WilliamDeWrites wrote:Why is this the "stolen exam"?

http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/dt/V ... y.45c.html