question for lsat experts/historians Forum

[Adrian Monk]

there is one circular based logic game on PT 47, G1. is that the only "circular'" logic game ever to appear on the lsat? I think so, but just wanted to confirm it, and students who have done this game, any advice on what made this game or this type of game easy for u.

[Christine (MLSAT)]

PT47, G1 is a basic ordering game. Were you thinking of PT41, G4? That one is circular ordering.

If that's what you meant, the only other circular ordering games (other than PT41, G4) would be:

• PT1, G1
  SuperPrep B - Feb 99, G3
  Feb 2014 (but, alas, this one is unreleased...)

Let me know if that's not what you meant.

[Adrian Monk]

PT47, G1 is a basic ordering game. Were you thinking of PT41, G4? That one is circular ordering.

If that's what you meant, the only other circular ordering games (other than PT41, G4) would be:

• PT1, G1
  SuperPrep B - Feb 99, G3
  Feb 2014 (but, alas, this one is unreleased...)

Let me know if that's not what you meant.

Hey Christine!,

yes, im so sorry, i meant game 4. Yea, so it is certainly a rare game type, and based on past tests, it is highly unlikely that i get it in sept right? but, would u still reccommend practicing these types? I am good at basic ordering games, but I really do not like this circular question type, and it frustrates me. and any general advice on these types, how to approach the diagram for this question that will make ansering q's easy.

[Adrian Monk]

bump

[KDLMaj]

PT47, G1 is a basic ordering game. Were you thinking of PT41, G4? That one is circular ordering.

If that's what you meant, the only other circular ordering games (other than PT41, G4) would be:

• PT1, G1
  SuperPrep B - Feb 99, G3
  Feb 2014 (but, alas, this one is unreleased...)

Let me know if that's not what you meant.

.
Hey Christine!,

yes, im so sorry, i meant game 4. Yea, so it is certainly a rare game type, and based on past tests, it is highly unlikely that i get it in sept right? but, would u still reccommend practicing these types? I am good at basic ordering games, but I really do not like this circular question type, and it frustrates me. and any general advice on these types, how to approach the diagram for this question that will make ansering q's easy.

Highly unlikely you will run into this. You're still struggling with other areas of the games, and so this shouldn't at all be a priority for you.

[ilikebaseball]

They had a circle game in Feb, an unheard of game in June. I just, for whatever reason, am confident that we wont see anything out of the ordinary... no saying it wont be difficult, but i think it'll be something we've seen before. Just speculation, but cmon... when have they ever screwed 3 exams worth of games over

[KDLMaj]

They had a circle game in Feb, an unheard of game in June. I just, for whatever reason, am confident that we wont see anything out of the ordinary... no saying it wont be difficult, but i think it'll be something we've seen before. Just speculation, but cmon... when have they ever screwed 3 exams worth of games over

Doesn't matter anyway. If they give you a game they think more people will miss than usual, they will make up for it in the other sections and/or the raw score to scaled score conversion. Focus on what you know will probably be there, and if you get to a point where you have all of that down you can start looming at the super rare stuff.

[Jeffort]

.... but cmon... when have they ever screwed 3 exams worth of games over

If the definition is having an oddball/unusual game in the section, then every LG section from PT1 in 1991 through all the tests up to at least 1994 or longer qualify as having 'screwed' people with a never seen before/rare type/weird variation per LG section given what was known/had been previously administered/available for prep at the times originally administered. The trend of almost all standard games sections is actually only a short portion of modern LSAT history, just going back the last 7ish or so years of tests and a few periods before that with an occasional test with a weird game so it's actually been the exception to the norm compared to the rest of LSAT history.

Making assumptions/guesses about what LSAC will/won't do is a dangerous game. It's best just to play it safe and be familiar with all known game types, just don't stress or obsess about them. They really aren't any harder than other game types in general other than the initial unfamiliarity with how to set them up. Basically, do and review them, don't stress about them and don't let your head suck yourself into playing 'what if' games about the Sept test as it looms closer day by day.

Don't ignore oddball/rare/unusual old game types but don't stress or obsess about them either. There is nothing to be afraid about and a lot of the difficulty people have with them on test day isn't because of the difficulty of the logic, it's because they react badly and kinda freak out instead of just thinking through the pieces. The 4th game from the June test is a good example, it's actually a fairly easy game once you understand the basic structure and simple rules. The 'OMFG WTF is this!!!! arrrg panic!' mental and emotional reaction on test day can and should be avoided simply by being a little bit flexible and not expecting every game to conform closely to something you've seen and practiced a bunch before.

Who knows what will be on the Sept test, I'm just as curious as you guys, but given the last two tests with old dinosaur types dusted off and reincarnated on the test plus the fact that in the last several years two new test specialist/test writers were hired, all bets are off with new blood in the mix. Somebody obviously went through the library of old tests to get inspiration to write the ones that were on the last two tests, who knows how much other inspiration they got from the other old oddballs? Just be prepared for anything and not rigid with your approach and expectations in case you get something with a twist.

For circular sequencing, just use spokes to keep track of the spaces around the circle instead of drawing a circle and putting slots around it. There are always an even number of variables, so just divide by two and make that many spokes for your base and hypos. Other than that, it's just like regular sequencing except that you also have the facing each other relationships.