Top Law Schools

So, I have been prepping for a couple months.

I worked through several guide books for the LR section (Manhattan, Powerscore) and Mike's LSAT Trainer.

I also completed the ten tests in the 10 Actual, Official LSATs or whatever (the one with preptests in the single digits and teens).

Score went from 173 (diagnostic) to 180 consistently by the end of the book, with -0 or maybe -1 per test.


I just took PTs A and B in the Superprep book, and it felt like I was taken a test written by completely different individuals. I ended up scoring a 177-178 on both. Which obviously is pretty good, but is extremely distressing because I got like -5 to -7 on both tests, which is much lower than normal. Even worse, I missed RC questions, which has not happened for some time, and my LR score was lower than normal. I know the LG sections are hard, so that is perhaps more understandable.

I need help interpreting these results and contextualizing the Superprep PTs, because I really cannot understand my sudden drop. I also want to know whether I should focus on more recent tests because they will be more similar in style to the SP PTs than to the older PTs. Specific concerns:

1) LG sections: I have having problems on abstract games with few inferences that are question-focused (e.g. several games in PT B like the couple game, and the professor/lecturer/instructor game in A). This seems like too specific a problem to warrant purchasing several LG guides, but perhaps I should. Even more specifically, I seem to have problems really internalizing the little information that is provided in the stimulus and solving some "could be true" or "could not be true" questions that weave in the stimulus info only very indirectly.

2) LR and RC sections: Some of the questions were in my opinion ambiguously worded or unclear, which for me was never the case with the other PTs I have taken. Even worse, in the case of RC, some questions seemed to have answers that were simply not supported by the test, and (!) this was essentially acknowledged by the explanations. I NEVER ran into this issue when doing the ten other LSATs. Often, I could re-read the question and easily determine the correct answer. With PTs A and B, sometimes I was uncertain of the answer even after reading the solution.


I am happy to provide references to specific questions in any section, if respondents think it would be helpful.

aegor wrote:So, I have been prepping for a couple months.

I worked through several guide books for the LR section (Manhattan, Powerscore) and Mike's LSAT Trainer.

I also completed the ten tests in the 10 Actual, Official LSATs or whatever (the one with preptests in the single digits and teens).

Score went from 173 (diagnostic) to 180 consistently by the end of the book, with -0 or maybe -1 per test.


I just took PTs A and B in the Superprep book, and it felt like I was taken a test written by completely different individuals. I ended up scoring a 177-178 on both. Which obviously is pretty good, but is extremely distressing because I got like -5 to -7 on both tests, which is much lower than normal. Even worse, I missed RC questions, which has not happened for some time, and my LR score was lower than normal. I know the LG sections are hard, so that is perhaps more understandable.

I need help interpreting these results and contextualizing the Superprep PTs, because I really cannot understand my sudden drop. I also want to know whether I should focus on more recent tests because they will be more similar in style to the SP PTs than to the older PTs. Specific concerns:

1) LG sections: I have having problems on abstract games with few inferences that are question-focused (e.g. several games in PT B like the couple game, and the professor/lecturer/instructor game in A). This seems like too specific a problem to warrant purchasing several LG guides, but perhaps I should. Even more specifically, I seem to have problems really internalizing the little information that is provided in the stimulus and solving some "could be true" or "could not be true" questions that weave in the stimulus info only very indirectly.

2) LR and RC sections: Some of the questions were in my opinion ambiguously worded or unclear, which for me was never the case with the other PTs I have taken. Even worse, in the case of RC, some questions seemed to have answers that were simply not supported by the test, and (!) this was essentially acknowledged by the explanations. I NEVER ran into this issue when doing the ten other LSATs. Often, I could re-read the question and easily determine the correct answer. With PTs A and B, sometimes I was uncertain of the answer even after reading the solution.


I am happy to provide references to specific questions in any section, if respondents think it would be helpful.

Those scores (180,177,178) are statistically the same. Get some rest, you're getting worried over nothing.

The PT's in the superprep book are generally viewed as more difficult and unrepresentative of the current test. Don't sweat it at all. you're good.