Page 1 of 1
SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:56 am
by MiracleNeeded
For the past month I have been struggling with games. Getting low scores in the single digits and scoring relatively high (-2 to -4) on LR, and crappy but ok on RC. I started drilling and drilling and took a PT today with a timer and the 7 sage proctor. I kept track of my time and felt good. Well I got a 21 on games, WOOHOO, 18 on RC better than my usual 14-16 so woohoo, but my strength, 16 on each. WTF? What. the. F******ck?
At least I know what my problem was, I need a clock to discipline my self per section esp. on games and reading which is why I think I scored so high. I'm just frustrated, if I kept up the past LR scores I may have been able to break the 160s.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:04 am
by PRgradBYU
Did you have a question?
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:35 am
by Clearly
PRgradBYU wrote:Did you have a question?
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:44 pm
by MiracleNeeded
PRgradBYU wrote:Did you have a question?
I thought it was pretty clear.
What the fuck?
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:45 pm
by dowu
MiracleNeeded wrote:PRgradBYU wrote:Did you have a question?
I thought it was pretty clear.
What the fuck?
It's not.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:06 pm
by objection_your_honor
If you're still not in the 160s and you're missing half the LR questions I don't think it's as useful to take PTs right now. Get the Manhattan books, get the Cambridge packets, and put in the work. Drill questions by type (untimed). Write out explanations for every question and every answer choice. Bottom line is you aren't seeing these questions like you should be, so work on your test vision before you start taking PTs again.
Testing with a clock is essential to learning how to pace yourself, so that was a good move on your part.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:16 am
by MiracleNeeded
objection_your_honor wrote:If you're still not in the 160s and you're missing half the LR questions I don't think it's as useful to take PTs right now. Get the Manhattan books, get the Cambridge packets, and put in the work. Drill questions by type (untimed). Write out explanations for every question and every answer choice. Bottom line is you aren't seeing these questions like you should be, so work on your test vision before you start taking PTs again.
Testing with a clock is essential to learning how to pace yourself, so that was a good move on your part.
I'll take your advise, but I will say this. My problems with LR have really started when I started taking the old PTs 7-12. These PTs have given me problems with LR. the newer ones have been good on average 20 correct or more. They've dropped with the older PTs, and I think my games have improved with the timing and with my improved grouping diagrams. Some people here think that LR in older tests had looser language and that may be my problem. I'll still hit the manhattan book on LR and try to sure that up.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:52 am
by ArtistOfManliness
MiracleNeeded wrote:PRgradBYU wrote:Did you have a question?
I thought it was pretty clear.
What the fuck?
Fair enough. The answer is that you are clearly not meant to be a lawyer. I hear that the nursing field is hiring.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:54 am
by jk148706
PRgradBYU wrote:Did you have a question?
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:55 am
by ManoftheHour
I don't get it. Not to be a dick, but how can you be "so close" to breaking 160 and 170 at the same time? I broke 160 a long time ago and it's a world of difference between that and a 170.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:08 am
by MiracleNeeded
ArtistOfManliness wrote:MiracleNeeded wrote:PRgradBYU wrote:Did you have a question?
I thought it was pretty clear.
What the fuck?
Fair enough. The answer is that you are clearly not meant to be a lawyer. I hear that the nursing field is hiring.
Another bitter asshole on the TLS boards. What a surprise. Lawyer or not, I have a successful business to fall back on, and you'll still be a dick that gets a sense of satisfaction in telling people what you think they can't do. You must have a small penis.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:10 am
by MiracleNeeded
ManoftheHour wrote:I don't get it. Not to be a dick, but how can you be "so close" to breaking 160 and 170 at the same time? I broke 160 a long time ago and it's a world of difference between that and a 170.
With an additional 6 points in each LR section, which I know I'm capable of achieving, I would have gotten a 167 which both breaks 160 and is close to 170.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:20 am
by ManoftheHour
MiracleNeeded wrote:ManoftheHour wrote:I don't get it. Not to be a dick, but how can you be "so close" to breaking 160 and 170 at the same time? I broke 160 a long time ago and it's a world of difference between that and a 170.
With an additional 6 points in each LR section, which I know I'm capable of achieving, I would have gotten a 167 which both breaks 160 and is close to 170.
I gotcha. Well, the only thing I can tell you is that now you know what you're capable of in each section. Of course, you're going to want to fine tune all of them, but at least now you know that if you had a "good day" on the LSAT and all the stars aligned, you can get that score. That's the only thing I would take from this experience. I mean, I've gotten perfects on all the sections before. However, they were on different exams. I know it's unlikely that I'll get a 180, but I'd like to think that if the stars aligned, I could. Of course, certain exams are built in a way in which certain sections are ridiculously hard and others are seemingly easy.
In the meantime, just keep drilling.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:32 am
by MiracleNeeded
ManoftheHour wrote:MiracleNeeded wrote:ManoftheHour wrote:I don't get it. Not to be a dick, but how can you be "so close" to breaking 160 and 170 at the same time? I broke 160 a long time ago and it's a world of difference between that and a 170.
With an additional 6 points in each LR section, which I know I'm capable of achieving, I would have gotten a 167 which both breaks 160 and is close to 170.
I gotcha. Well, the only thing I can tell you is that now you know what you're capable of in each section. Of course, you're going to want to fine tune all of them, but at least now you know that if you had a "good day" on the LSAT and all the stars aligned, you can get that score. That's the only thing I would take from this experience. I mean, I've gotten perfects on all the sections before. However, they were on different exams. I know it's unlikely that I'll get a 180, but I'd like to think that if the stars aligned, I could. Of course, certain exams are built in a way in which certain sections are ridiculously hard and others are seemingly easy.
In the meantime, just keep drilling.
That's what I've been trying to keep in mind, that I can get near perfect in games, that I one CAN really improve reading comp so long as you keep a good pace and learn the technique, and as you mentioned, I know what I can do on LR.
I just sucked that back when my games were crap my LR was near perfect and now that my games are up to snuff my LR takes a nose dive.
Anyway, thanks for your positive comments and advice, glad to see this board isn't filled with assholes like artofmanliness
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 2:56 am
by Clearly
MiracleNeeded wrote:ManoftheHour wrote:I don't get it. Not to be a dick, but how can you be "so close" to breaking 160 and 170 at the same time? I broke 160 a long time ago and it's a world of difference between that and a 170.
With an additional 6 points in each LR section, which I know I'm capable of achieving, I would have gotten a 167 which both breaks 160 and is close to 170.
lol, I'm not a TLS hater by a long shot, but this is dumb. You are fighting the hardest part of the curve up top, to go from 160 to 170 usually requires getting about half as many questions wrong (literally being twice as good). I'm not saying you can't do it, but realize you still have much work to do, and pace yourself accordingly.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:17 am
by MiracleNeeded
Clearly wrote:MiracleNeeded wrote:ManoftheHour wrote:I don't get it. Not to be a dick, but how can you be "so close" to breaking 160 and 170 at the same time? I broke 160 a long time ago and it's a world of difference between that and a 170.
With an additional 6 points in each LR section, which I know I'm capable of achieving, I would have gotten a 167 which both breaks 160 and is close to 170.
lol, I'm not a TLS hater by a long shot, but this is dumb. You are fighting the hardest part of the curve up top, to go from 160 to 170 usually requires getting about half as many questions wrong (literally being twice as good). I'm not saying you can't do it, but realize you still have much work to do, and pace yourself accordingly.
I'm not saying it will be easy, but after adjusting my games and fixing the issue that was making me get single digit scores I feel that the possibility is greater. My games blew up after I figured out how to streamline my grouping games and as I mentioned my pacing. If I can keep that up and figure out what is going on with my LR it isn't unreasonable to honk that my score can jump significantly.
My theory is that the older LR questions are not my forte and that the newer ones (52 and up) are my strength which is fine, because those are the LRs that I will face. Even when I took my diagnostic and bombed the test in the low 140s my LR was strong, about minus 3 or 4 that was test 68. My LRs didn't drop until now with tests 7,9,10 and 11. With games being "easier" in recent times and RC being about the same, I see a jump within reach, hence he frustrated post.
Re: SO CLOSE TO BREAKING 160 even 170. Ahhhhh frustrating.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:38 am
by Clearly
MiracleNeeded wrote:Clearly wrote:MiracleNeeded wrote:ManoftheHour wrote:I don't get it. Not to be a dick, but how can you be "so close" to breaking 160 and 170 at the same time? I broke 160 a long time ago and it's a world of difference between that and a 170.
With an additional 6 points in each LR section, which I know I'm capable of achieving, I would have gotten a 167 which both breaks 160 and is close to 170.
lol, I'm not a TLS hater by a long shot, but this is dumb. You are fighting the hardest part of the curve up top, to go from 160 to 170 usually requires getting about half as many questions wrong (literally being twice as good). I'm not saying you can't do it, but realize you still have much work to do, and pace yourself accordingly.
I'm not saying it will be easy, but after adjusting my games and fixing the issue that was making me get single digit scores I feel that the possibility is greater. My games blew up after I figured out how to streamline my grouping games and as I mentioned my pacing. If I can keep that up and figure out what is going on with my LR it isn't unreasonable to honk that my score can jump significantly.
My theory is that the older LR questions are not my forte and that the newer ones (52 and up) are my strength which is fine, because those are the LRs that I will face. Even when I took my diagnostic and bombed the test in the low 140s my LR was strong, about minus 3 or 4 that was test 68. My LRs didn't drop until now with tests 7,9,10 and 11. With games being "easier" in recent times and RC being about the same, I see a jump within reach, hence he frustrated post.
That's all good, just getting from even 165-170 feels impossible..just hang with it.