Top Law Schools

Anyone ever play baseball? Remember the doughnut's you slide onto the barrel? Well, I want to incorporate a similar strategy for the LSAT. Does anyone know any booklets with ridiculously hard LG's, arguments, or RC passages.

You can find lists online of what are generally considered to be the hardest LSAT questions, and take them all together. Alternatively, you can give yourself less than 35 minutes per section in your prep, or do more than five sections in a sitting to build your endurance.

I don't know that it's a good idea to use less than 35 minutes. The LSAT is all about consistency. You have to know when you're moving quickly and when you're falling behind. It's not really beneficial to get better at going faster than you need to because you want to go just slow enough to use every single second of your time.

PowerScore's got products like that. They have books with the hardest logic games and reading comp passages on their site on their Question Collections page.

I'm looking for games, arguments, and passages that have never appeared on the LSAT. For instance, a linear game with 11 slots, an argument with extremely dense language and very subtle reasoning, or an RC passage written in Latin (jk!). However, I wonder if anyone has ever taken the time to translate an RC passage into Latin...

RobertGolddust wrote:I'm looking for games, arguments, and passages that have never appeared on the LSAT.

While some of the experts out there could do a fine job replicating an LSAT argument, most people don't spend their free time drawing up questions when there are hundreds of "real" sets out there. The people who do it professionally work for LSAC.

Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:

RobertGolddust wrote:I'm looking for games, arguments, and passages that have never appeared on the LSAT.

While some of the experts out there could do a fine job replicating an LSAT argument, most people don't spend their free time drawing up questions when there are hundreds of "real" sets out there. The people who do it professionally work for LSAC.

^This. *BUT* as far as super-hard-but-fake questions go, I really like the LSAT Workout (not to be confused with the Logic Games Workout) for games (not bad for RC either). Absolutely terrible for Args though.

Philafaler wrote:I don't know that it's a good idea to use less than 35 minutes. The LSAT is all about consistency. You have to know when you're moving quickly and when you're falling behind. It's not really beneficial to get better at going faster than you need to because you want to go just slow enough to use every single second of your time.

Disagree. LSAT is all about making sure you know how to do it well enough to get the score you want (which can take from zero to a lot of studying) and then making sure that you have enough breathing room to deal with whatever happens on test day (which is the hard part that I unfortunately ignored). Getting down to 30 min/section sounds like a great way to do this, and there's no reason that the test can't be done that quickly.

Kaplan's 180 - I don't know what it's reputation is like for people around here, but it served me pretty well when I wanted to get from high 160s into the 170s

Ace the LSAT Logic Games has some pretty ridiculously hard games that I found helpful. Don't get it unless you've done every other game at least twice though.

You may want to check out the Manhattan LSAT Challenge Game Archive --

I also want to suggest that you might want to try some "arm tied behind your back" exercises, where, instead of trying harder q's, games, etc., you make normal q's harder on yourself by incorporating some extreme limitations -- I think these exercises can have much the same effect as what you are going for with the donut; I also think these exercises are really useful ways to re-use q's you've tried before --

Some examples --

1) Try to solve a section's worth of LR q's by only eliminating wrong answers. Do not allow yourself to confirm the right answer. See how many you can get right.
2) Try to solve a section's worth of LR q's by only trying to id the right answer. Don't use wrong-to-right at all. See how many you can get right.
3) Try to solve a section's worth of RC q's without ever looking back at passages -- that is, by completely relying on your initial read to answer all q's. See how many you can get right.
4) Try to solve a section's worth of RC q's without doing an initial read of the passages -- that is, by looking at the passage the first time as you are trying to solve q's (if this seems too extreme, then allow yourself an initial :30 or 1:00 skim of the passage).

And not exactly the same idea but related -- try to solve logic games two different ways (put some time in-between)
5) With extremely minimal diagrams, where basically all you do is notate the rules and where you have to do a ton of work in the q's.
6) By doing as much up front work as you can -- creating frames, trying to come up with all inferences, etc.

A common pattern I've seen with students is that learning about right or efficient strategies allows them to get to a certain score level, and then flexibility/back-up strategies etc. are what is required to get to the top of the mountain, so to speak --in terms of "extreme" drills, I think the above can be very helpful for developing a well-rounded skill set, so that you when don't find that answer you expected for a particular q, or when the reading of a passage doesn't go as well for you as you would have liked, you feel confident in your ability to adapt. There are some other benefits to the above exercises as well (such as developing a better sense of which LR are designed for you to predict the answer, and which ones are not).

Wow, got way longer than I planned - hope at least some of that is useful and relevant -- MK

redsox wrote:

Philafaler wrote:I don't know that it's a good idea to use less than 35 minutes. The LSAT is all about consistency. You have to know when you're moving quickly and when you're falling behind. It's not really beneficial to get better at going faster than you need to because you want to go just slow enough to use every single second of your time.

Disagree. LSAT is all about making sure you know how to do it well enough to get the score you want (which can take from zero to a lot of studying) and then making sure that you have enough breathing room to deal with whatever happens on test day (which is the hard part that I unfortunately ignored). Getting down to 30 min/section sounds like a great way to do this, and there's no reason that the test can't be done that quickly.

Ok, depends what you mean by 30 min/section. I liked to finish the section in that amount of time, then use the last five to bubble/check certain answers/finish if I fell behind. If you only plan on trying to finish all the questions in 30 minutes, then that's fine and probably a good idea (That doesn't mean that you should do sections with a 30 minute timer, though). If you want to use 30 minutes finish all the questions, check it, bubble, and whatever else, then you're going to have to finish the questions in ~25 minutes. That's rushing, and that's not helpful.

I think we generally agree here?

You may want to check out the Manhattan LSAT Challenge Game Archive --

I also want to suggest that you might want to try some "arm tied behind your back" exercises, where, instead of trying harder q's, games, etc., you make normal q's harder on yourself by incorporating some extreme limitations -- I think these exercises can have much the same effect as what you are going for with the donut; I also think these exercises are really useful ways to re-use q's you've tried before --

Some examples --

1) Try to solve a section's worth of LR q's by only eliminating wrong answers. Do not allow yourself to confirm the right answer. See how many you can get right.
2) Try to solve a section's worth of LR q's by only trying to id the right answer. Don't use wrong-to-right at all. See how many you can get right.
3) Try to solve a section's worth of RC q's without ever looking back at passages -- that is, by completely relying on your initial read to answer all q's. See how many you can get right.
4) Try to solve a section's worth of RC q's without doing an initial read of the passages -- that is, by looking at the passage the first time as you are trying to solve q's (if this seems too extreme, then allow yourself an initial :30 or 1:00 skim of the passage).

And not exactly the same idea but related -- try to solve logic games two different ways (put some time in-between)
5) With extremely minimal diagrams, where basically all you do is notate the rules and where you have to do a ton of work in the q's.
6) By doing as much up front work as you can -- creating frames, trying to come up with all inferences, etc.

A common pattern I've seen with students is that learning about right or efficient strategies allows them to get to a certain score level, and then flexibility/back-up strategies etc. are what is required to get to the top of the mountain, so to speak --in terms of "extreme" drills, I think the above can be very helpful for developing a well-rounded skill set, so that you when don't find that answer you expected for a particular q, or when the reading of a passage doesn't go as well for you as you would have liked, you feel confident in your ability to adapt. There are some other benefits to the above exercises as well (such as developing a better sense of which LR are designed for you to predict the answer, and which ones are not).

Wow, got way longer than I planned - hope at least some of that is useful and relevant -- MK

Great stuff, and my regards to the other posters and their excellent suggestions. Hopefully, your suggestions will help me find the stairs to the super man

redsox wrote:

Philafaler wrote:I don't know that it's a good idea to use less than 35 minutes. The LSAT is all about consistency. You have to know when you're moving quickly and when you're falling behind. It's not really beneficial to get better at going faster than you need to because you want to go just slow enough to use every single second of your time.

Disagree. LSAT is all about making sure you know how to do it well enough to get the score you want (which can take from zero to a lot of studying) and then making sure that you have enough breathing room to deal with whatever happens on test day (which is the hard part that I unfortunately ignored). Getting down to 30 min/section sounds like a great way to do this, and there's no reason that the test can't be done that quickly.

Yeah, that's where I was going with my suggestion. Speed itself shouldn't be a goal (i.e. you shouldn't be trying to finish sections in 20 minutes just for the sake of having 15 minutes left over). But if you can get to where your 'normal' pacing gets you through a section in 30 minutes, then that gives you a little cushion for a particularly brutal game, or an RC passage that doesn't appear to be written in English, even though you recognize all the individual words in it.

Alternatively, you could try one of these. With practice, you may be able to increase your speed by 20% or more.**

http://www.amazon.com/Kinsman-Enterpris ... 1386654186





** on bubbling only.

The LSAT Trainer wrote:You may want to check out the Manhattan LSAT Challenge Game Archive --

I also want to suggest that you might want to try some "arm tied behind your back" exercises, where, instead of trying harder q's, games, etc., you make normal q's harder on yourself by incorporating some extreme limitations -- I think these exercises can have much the same effect as what you are going for with the donut; I also think these exercises are really useful ways to re-use q's you've tried before --

Some examples --

1) Try to solve a section's worth of LR q's by only eliminating wrong answers. Do not allow yourself to confirm the right answer. See how many you can get right.
2) Try to solve a section's worth of LR q's by only trying to id the right answer. Don't use wrong-to-right at all. See how many you can get right.
3) Try to solve a section's worth of RC q's without ever looking back at passages -- that is, by completely relying on your initial read to answer all q's. See how many you can get right.
4) Try to solve a section's worth of RC q's without doing an initial read of the passages -- that is, by looking at the passage the first time as you are trying to solve q's (if this seems too extreme, then allow yourself an initial :30 or 1:00 skim of the passage).

And not exactly the same idea but related -- try to solve logic games two different ways (put some time in-between)
5) With extremely minimal diagrams, where basically all you do is notate the rules and where you have to do a ton of work in the q's.
6) By doing as much up front work as you can -- creating frames, trying to come up with all inferences, etc.

A common pattern I've seen with students is that learning about right or efficient strategies allows them to get to a certain score level, and then flexibility/back-up strategies etc. are what is required to get to the top of the mountain, so to speak --in terms of "extreme" drills, I think the above can be very helpful for developing a well-rounded skill set, so that you when don't find that answer you expected for a particular q, or when the reading of a passage doesn't go as well for you as you would have liked, you feel confident in your ability to adapt. There are some other benefits to the above exercises as well (such as developing a better sense of which LR are designed for you to predict the answer, and which ones are not).

Wow, got way longer than I planned - hope at least some of that is useful and relevant -- MK

sometimes im willing to go for the choice after reasoning instead of gut-eliminating extreme word like primarily,never,most..
EDIT:not saying its not useful, it just makes me feel like its cheating or unsafe about my choice though.. bloody lsat not gonna work out for stubborn people like me

Cambridge LSAT prep: http://www.cambridgelsat.com/

They have bundles of the most difficult LG, LR, and RC questions that you can purchase as PDFs.

Alternatively, you could try one of these. With practice, you may be able to increase your speed by 20% or more.**

--LinkRemoved-- ... 1386654186





** on bubbling only.

I like your style.