Top Law Schools

I just got the powerscore LRB, but I've been seeing a few posts about Manhattan's LR book being better or just as good but less wordy. Is there a consensus on which is best? I don't know if there's one I should read first or if I should return LRB and get Manhattan while I'm still within the refund window.

Don't have experience with the LRB, but the Manhattan LR is great.

Powerscore LRB actually made my LR score worse; Manhattan LR increased it significantly. Take it as you will.

The Trainer --> Manhattan LR --> PS LR

ETA: I would do a read of the Trainer, then follow up with Manhattan and lots of drilling.

rebexness wrote:The Trainer --> Manhattan LR --> PS LR

Unpopular opinion, but I don't like the Trainer for LR. It's good as an introduction, but it doesn't go into detail enough imo.

aesth24 wrote:Don't have experience with the LRB, but the Manhattan LR is great.

Same here. I have never once looked at the PS LRB so I can't give you a comparison but I can attest that Manhattan LR is the shit. Definitely gave me that final little boost in LR to start getting 99th percentile scores

Anyone studying for the LSAT who doesn't read the first 6 chapters of MLR done fucked up.

both

Is the Manhattan LR a fairly recent creation? I guess this is what I get for reading the old "How to get 160+ on your LSAT" thread.

Is the LGB still considered good? I'll go ahead and get the Manhattan LR and the trainer I guess.

camcam wrote:Is the Manhattan LR a fairly recent creation? I guess this is what I get for reading the old "How to get 160+ on your LSAT" thread.

Is the LGB still considered good? I'll go ahead and get the Manhattan LR and the trainer I guess.

That would be a recommended purchase.

I was actually really unimpressed with powerscore LR. Seemed like it wanted to teach cheap tricks instead of really explaining how to understand LR concepts. E.g. it gave a really funky logic for how to deal with some/all questions, which was just confusing and did not explain the intricacies (and true rationale) of these problems. It also completely overlooked the difference between necessary and sufficient assumptions (if I recall correctly).

Get Manhattan.

esse est percipi wrote:I was actually really unimpressed with powerscore LR. Seemed like it wanted to teach cheap tricks instead of really explaining how to understand LR concepts. E.g. it gave a really funky logic for how to deal with some/all questions, which was just confusing and did not explain the intricacies (and true rationale) of these problems. It also completely overlooked the difference between necessary and sufficient assumptions (if I recall correctly).

Get Manhattan.

I don't think it overlooks the necessary/sufficient, it just groups the question types differently. IIRC Powerscore identifies them as Justify the Conclusion (Sufficient Assumption) and Assumption (Necessary Assumption). Its different than Manhattan but its essentially the same thing. However, I would agree that Manhattan does a better job at stressing the importance of this distinction, which is really useful imo. I did Powerscore first and then Manhattan, and this key was probably the most important thing I picked up from Manhattan. It makes assumtion questions much easier which for a lot of people are some of the most difficult types.

If I had to choose I'd give the edge to Manhattan for LR, since Powerscore is a bit less detailed and focuses too much on formal logic. For LG I liked Powerscore better, though I really don't like their sequencing game diagramming (I used 7sage).

I thought Manhattan was much better, and their section on assumption family questions was invaluable for me. PS was ok but not as helpful, and their section on parallel reasoning should be avoided imo.

I did the LRB first and I didn't really notice a difference. I just finished the Manhattan book yesterday, so I don't know how it affected my scores at all. But I feel much more comfortable with sufficient and necessary assumptions, and the LR as a whole. It is worth the money. LRB gives off the vibe of something written by instructors looking at the problem after the fact, manhattan writes out how you should be thinking as you read each individual sentence and question stem.

Brettanomyces wrote:Anyone studying for the LSAT who doesn't read the first 6 chapters of MLR done fucked up.

This is a ridiculous overstatement. never even knew that book existed

Definitely Manhattan. LRB is bloated and shallow.

esse est percipi wrote:I was actually really unimpressed with powerscore LR. Seemed like it wanted to teach cheap tricks instead of really explaining how to understand LR concepts. E.g. it gave a really funky logic for how to deal with some/all questions, which was just confusing and did not explain the intricacies (and true rationale) of these problems. It also completely overlooked the difference between necessary and sufficient assumptions (if I recall correctly).

Get Manhattan.

PS really cheapens the Sufficient Assumption q techniques. Their "Shell Game" classification of tricky wrong answer choices is also not very helpful, IMO.

My copies of the Trainer and MLR are coming in today!

Is there a consensus on which one to start with? This is the very beginning of my prep (probably taking the June '14 LSAT) so I think I'll start with LR stuff in the Manhattan book.

Sorry if I'm being too nit-picky! I just want to make sure I'm not doing anything that will screw up my prep.