Top Law Schools

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:I think a key difference is that for in/out games, the max number of things "in" is restricted by the rules/ relationships between variables. Eg if you have 7 variables, you could potentially have all 7 "in" until you start getting to rules that say something like "if a then not b". That limits it to 6.

In a dual layer grouping game the number in each layer will be defined. Other than that it's ok to think of X as in and Y as out (in your example). That can help with some key deductions, because when you get a rule that's like "if A is in X then B is in Y". If you get B in X, that's actually the contrapositive.

Usually you'll get different game types, but that's not a rule. The earlier tests would sometimes have a sequencing game and a dual layer sequencing game. I've also seen tests with multiple grouping games.

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:

stcait wrote:

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:I think a key difference is that for in/out games, the max number of things "in" is restricted by the rules/ relationships between variables. Eg if you have 7 variables, you could potentially have all 7 "in" until you start getting to rules that say something like "if a then not b". That limits it to 6.

In a dual layer grouping game the number in each layer will be defined. Other than that it's ok to think of X as in and Y as out (in your example). That can help with some key deductions, because when you get a rule that's like "if A is in X then B is in Y". If you get B in X, that's actually the contrapositive.

Usually you'll get different game types, but that's not a rule. The earlier tests would sometimes have a sequencing game and a dual layer sequencing game. I've also seen tests with multiple grouping games.

Thanks!
I'll do some more practices...
Do you think doing old games helped you to increase your score on LG? I heard there are a lot of unusual games on old PTs, and wondered I should do them...I don't have a lot of time, so need to use time wisely and wonder whether to do or not

If your absolutely rushed for time, newer is always better. But I would also save newer tests for actual PTs.
I actually think older games are helpful to understand rules and setups. There are some unusual ones in the really early PTs (1-15) but that does help you learn to roll with the punches a bit. From about the 30s onward I think they're pretty streamlined.

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:Just going off the top of my head, I really like all of the games from PT 39. Kind of a good basics/ game with Just enough of a twist to throw you off if you're understanding of games is off.
I'll try and think of more.
I don't think I can link directly to questions.

ltowns1 wrote:PT 35 gave me some major problems with the first two, I think those two are good to look at as well.

ltowns1 wrote:Well with me I tend to overthink things, so I would say I made these games a little harder than they were. I think those first two are games where you want to focus on, and game three and four are relatively easy.

Manhattan Prep Matt wrote:

ltowns1 wrote:Well with me I tend to overthink things, so I would say I made these games a little harder than they were. I think those first two are games where you want to focus on, and game three and four are relatively easy.

Is that second game the cars w/ options game? If so, that's actually a great example of an open grouping game. You should have pretty much everything filled out before you head to the questions (I think cars T and Z are the only one with any variability). With a strong process on those games, you can get through them very quickly and accurately - if you struggle with it, I'd take another look at that game type!

The big takeaway on that game type is that the size of the groups is as important (if not more so) than what elements are in each group.