Top Law Schools

Hey everyone, doing some last minute drilling to address recent LSAT trends I can expect to see on Saturday.

In discussing recent PTs, I've seen several posters say that the LSAT changed noticeably after PT50. Others said they see a marked difference after PT69, while others see a big change after 72.

I'm not sure how much analysis here will help on test day, but what are these trends that everyone's seeing? Any particular questions/sections/PTs that are particularly indicative of these trends? I've noticed that LG has gotten much more straightforward and more predictable, but trends in other sections seem negligible to me.

Please don't just say "RC harder, LG easier." Looking for a little nuance here. Apologies if this topic has already been beaten to death.

Mrs Featherbottom wrote:Hey everyone, doing some last minute drilling to address recent LSAT trends I can expect to see on Saturday.

In discussing recent PTs, I've seen several posters say that the LSAT changed noticeably after PT50. Others said they see a marked difference after PT69, while others see a big change after 72.

I'm not sure how much analysis here will help on test day, but what are these trends that everyone's seeing? Any particular questions/sections/PTs that are particularly indicative of these trends? I've noticed that LG has gotten much more straightforward and more predictable, but trends in other sections seem negligible to me.

Please don't just say "RC harder, LG easier." Looking for a little nuance here. Apologies if this topic has already been beaten to death.

have you done the recent LG?

nlee10 wrote:

Mrs Featherbottom wrote:Hey everyone, doing some last minute drilling to address recent LSAT trends I can expect to see on Saturday.

In discussing recent PTs, I've seen several posters say that the LSAT changed noticeably after PT50. Others said they see a marked difference after PT69, while others see a big change after 72.

I'm not sure how much analysis here will help on test day, but what are these trends that everyone's seeing? Any particular questions/sections/PTs that are particularly indicative of these trends? I've noticed that LG has gotten much more straightforward and more predictable, but trends in other sections seem negligible to me.

Please don't just say "RC harder, LG easier." Looking for a little nuance here. Apologies if this topic has already been beaten to death.

have you done the recent LG?

75? Yeah, I took the June 2015 test. That had some pretty strange setups. I've been drilling the LGs from the 90s in case the October test is similar.

Mrs Featherbottom wrote: 75? Yeah, I took the June 2015 test. That had some pretty strange setups. I've been drilling the LGs from the 90s in case the October test is similar.

Spoiler alert:

PT 72 has another unusual LG. PT 73/74 have very time-consuming LG's. PT 68 has a super time-consuming game. I think there's a shift towards rule-driven brute forcing your way games.

nlee10 wrote:

Mrs Featherbottom wrote: 75? Yeah, I took the June 2015 test. That had some pretty strange setups. I've been drilling the LGs from the 90s in case the October test is similar.

Spoiler alert:

PT 72 has another unusual LG. PT 73/74 have very time-consuming LG's. PT 68 has a super time-consuming game. I think there's a shift towards rule-driven brute forcing your way games.

I agree with this. Less inferences to make and more plugging and chugging.

I also think NA questions are changing. Ive seen two now with answers that are really SAs. (I forget the PTs, but one in RC and one in LR).

I personally think that RC questions are less strict with wording, too, but that may just be me. What I mean by that is that the best answers now on some RC are kind of shitty answers. Again, might just be me.

mist4bison wrote:

nlee10 wrote:

Mrs Featherbottom wrote: 75? Yeah, I took the June 2015 test. That had some pretty strange setups. I've been drilling the LGs from the 90s in case the October test is similar.

Spoiler alert:

PT 72 has another unusual LG. PT 73/74 have very time-consuming LG's. PT 68 has a super time-consuming game. I think there's a shift towards rule-driven brute forcing your way games.

I agree with this. Less inferences to make and more plugging and chugging.

I also think NA questions are changing. Ive seen two now with answers that are really SAs. (I forget the PTs, but one in RC and one in LR).

I personally think that RC questions are less strict with wording, too, but that may just be me. What I mean by that is that the best answers now on some RC are kind of shitty answers. Again, might just be me.

So much this. I learned through my prep class last year that NA's used to have relatively "weak" answers but not anymore.

Post removed.

nlee10 wrote:

mist4bison wrote:

nlee10 wrote:

Mrs Featherbottom wrote: 75? Yeah, I took the June 2015 test. That had some pretty strange setups. I've been drilling the LGs from the 90s in case the October test is similar.

Spoiler alert:

PT 72 has another unusual LG. PT 73/74 have very time-consuming LG's. PT 68 has a super time-consuming game. I think there's a shift towards rule-driven brute forcing your way games.

I agree with this. Less inferences to make and more plugging and chugging.

I also think NA questions are changing. Ive seen two now with answers that are really SAs. (I forget the PTs, but one in RC and one in LR).

I personally think that RC questions are less strict with wording, too, but that may just be me. What I mean by that is that the best answers now on some RC are kind of shitty answers. Again, might just be me.

So much this. I learned through my prep class last year that NA's used to have relatively "weak" answers but not anymore.

Definitely agree on the NA questions. I think the trick of negating the answer to confirm it still seems to work at least. Took 69 and 70 over the weekend and hardly saw any SA questions (from what I remember), so maybe those are becoming less common in lieu of broader NAs.

Post removed.

Post removed.

theugg wrote:What are NA and SA questions?

Necessary assumption and sufficient assumption. It used to be that on an NA question if an SA answer popped up, it wasn't right, but now I'm seeing questions where an SA answer is the right AC for an NA question.

Trying to figure out an RC strategy too. I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks RC is weirder now.

Post removed.

mist4bison wrote:

theugg wrote:What are NA and SA questions?

Necessary assumption and sufficient assumption. It used to be that on an NA question if an SA answer popped up, it wasn't right, but now I'm seeing questions where an SA answer is the right AC for an NA question.

Trying to figure out an RC strategy too. I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks RC is weirder now.

LSAC caught on with these prep companies. If only I took the LSAT like 5 years ago when it was a bit more normal.

theugg wrote:

mist4bison wrote:

theugg wrote:What are NA and SA questions?

Necessary assumption and sufficient assumption. It used to be that on an NA question if an SA answer popped up, it wasn't right, but now I'm seeing questions where an SA answer is the right AC for an NA question.

Trying to figure out an RC strategy too. I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks RC is weirder now.

Do you have any examples of this reversal? I haven't noticed anything odd.

I think that 72-2-12 is a decent example. I feel like E could be the answer to an SA question. I mean, it very sufficiently fills the gap. I mean I guess it's required too, but I would expect it on an SAquestion. There are better examples, though. I know that there was a recent RC that really did this. I can't think of which one though.

mist4bison wrote:

theugg wrote:

mist4bison wrote:

theugg wrote:What are NA and SA questions?

Necessary assumption and sufficient assumption. It used to be that on an NA question if an SA answer popped up, it wasn't right, but now I'm seeing questions where an SA answer is the right AC for an NA question.

Trying to figure out an RC strategy too. I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks RC is weirder now.

Do you have any examples of this reversal? I haven't noticed anything odd.

I think that 72-2-12 is a decent example. I feel like E could be the answer to an SA question. I mean, it very sufficiently fills the gap. I mean I guess it's required too, but I would expect it on an SAquestion. There are better examples, though. I know that there was a recent RC that really did this. I can't think of which one though.

Yeah well just for logical clarification, technically a necessary assumption can also be sufficient and vice versa. However, it takes a special type of relation within the argument. It would be the equivalent to 'if and only if' instead of just 'if'. But yeah I have noticed that curveball also and its definitely a ploy to trip up those who automatically strike through SA answers on NA questions.

Post removed...

PT 72 LG 4 was definitely a WTF game for me.

Post removed.