Top Law Schools

Two days ago I took my first diagnostic test and got a 152. What really sunk me was the "logic games" section where I got a whopping one answer right, the first question.

I need to get a 160-162 for the December sitting. I have 2-3 hours I can commit to this per day until then. My LR and AR sections were roughly evenly split.

I've started doing PT's since then and am just wondering about a few things.

I think part of the reason that I did so poorly on the LG is because I didn't want to use any trial and error as far as inputting anything (other than what would remain true for all of the questions, or was given in a specific question, for example, if F is in 2) into any of the slots I created (which took me some time to figure out to do this). I figured if this strategy was not going to work on the real LSAT, then using it on this one might not be useful as far as indicating where I am at.

I understand pure trial and error is not good, but:

Am I at all allowed to input any of the the values from the answer options into the slots? It helps me visualize things more easily, but it is also I suppose possibly more time consuming than just being able to look at the options, and the rules and decide which to eliminate. After using some trial and error and getting the correct answer on one of the questions, it seems like I could have mentally figured it out without putting anything down (besides whatever was logically necessary from the question's (the large initial pargraph) rules and the specific question's rules).

I've also watched some 7sage videos, and it seems like he sometimes does input some of the values for the option answers, however I am not sure if he is just doing this to make it easier for the viewer to follow along. When he does this it seems quick and efficient, however, he edits his videos allowing him to immediately remove whatever he wrote down. If I on the other hand try to use trial and error with the answer options, my chart becomes very messy and I end up having to erase to do the following answers unless I manage to find the correct answer early on.


Also, if for the LR sections, I don't really have a strategy, and just pick a lot of the answers that "feel" right but that I am unsure of, but if I consistently get good scores on this section over many PT's, is that sufficient? Or should I know for sure that my answer is right? I suppose statistically it might not matter if I have a large enough sample size of PT's where this has worked, but I'm worried that LSAT nerves on test day might destroy this "strategy", as opposed to one that was based on more of a quantitative approach.

Finally, I am a pretty fast reader, but for this test I decided to go more slowly and I think it may have hurt me. Should I be reading as fast as I believe I can comprehend (for example my studying speed for exams in school), or is this just something that I'll have to take more PT's to find out?

Trial and error is an awful idea. For LG, the key is going through the setup and making deduction for the whole problem set. Then all of the questions become just taking the additional info and seeing what happens. There are a ton of resources for giving you strategies for approaching games. Search around this forum for ideas.

For logic games, occasionally trial and error is necessary (as in, maybe one question per section), but even then be clever about it - only bother inputting the values most likely to be the answer if you can. If it's taking you too long, move on.

I very much agree with Dcc617 that the key is going through the setup and making deduction for the whole problem set (I usually found that there were a certain number of deductions that came quickly and naturally, and after that it was best to just launch into the questions rather than wait around for more deductions to appear).

Don't ever, ever, ever erase answers - it takes far too much time. Instead, use a new mini-diagram for each question and set it up so that different trials can take place on different lines so you don't have to erase any.

As far as reading speed goes, definitely read as fast as you are able to process the information, and make sure you really engage with what is written - it makes it easier to remember and understand.

With LR, it is of course best to know that your answer is right. Obviously in early PTs you may not have time to do so in all cases, in which case the most important thing is to go back and methodically check each question once you've finished the PT. For every question, work out what the correct answer is and why. Eventually it should come naturally-enough in PTs that you won't need to just go with what 'feels right'.

Most importantly, however, buy/beg/borrow/steal the Logic Games Bible. It should clear up any remaining LG questions. Good luck!

Seems like you didn't find 7sage's process vastly more efficient than yours. FWIW, if your diagnostic PT is from 90's, a LOT of trial and error can be necessary. My first practice tests were from early PTs, and I was always dragged down; when I asked a friend who had taken the test before, he said he just did trial and error for one or two questions per game and I thought I was super stupid. Things get much better on newer ones.

Do every logic game and watch the 7sage YouTube video for it afterward... Boom 160+

Post removed...

Thanks for offering your insights, they've cleared up a few issues for me. This test doesn't seem nearly as intimidating as it did a week ago, although I don't require anything more than a 162 either.

It does seem like some trial and error is necessary, as at least one poster alluded to. The Logic Games bible seems to refer to this as a "hypothetical".

Holy cow... That book is like magic. Already I'm doing much better on the logic games. It's really an impressive book. I hope the LR book is as good.