Top Law Schools

I did not want to make a thread, because I think that many similar threads exist, but anxiety has got the better of me.

I took my diagnostic Preptest a few days ago. I have not studied LR or RC at all, but I have done many of the ostensible hardest LR and RC problems ever. e.g. dioxin and fish, meteorite impact craters, wood-burning stoves, titanium ink, beauty and truth, brown dwarfs, riddled basins of attraction, Dworkin, micropterous and macropterous butterflies, Hippocratic Oath, Hopi names. They gave me little trouble. The Games are a different story. Looking through the Logic Games Bible did not help.

Preptest 65 (December 2011).

LR #1: -2
LG: -13
RC: -2
LR #2 -4

Total Score: 165

I made only stupid mistakes on the LR and RC, easily remediable.

I don't know if I can reach consistent -0s (or even -10s) on LG before December. Have people made similar jumps?

100% doable, if you do the drillings every day.

Post removed.

Fair enough. Does anyone have the impression that the most recent LSATs are more difficult than 60s tests (particularly 65)?

Puncture wrote:Fair enough. Does anyone have the impression that the most recent LSATs are more difficult than 60s tests (particularly 65)?

They are definitely different, not necessarily harder though, depends on your strengths I guess. I think the consensus seems to be that LG has become more rule based (as opposed to requiring inferences) and TCR for RC and LR have become slightly more ambiguous.

Puncture wrote:Fair enough. Does anyone have the impression that the most recent LSATs are more difficult than 60s tests (particularly 65)?

Test 65 was my highest PT out of 5 so far (171), with my others being low 160s (mid 30s test, 66, and 40 something). What a great problem you have! I'll trade you my LG for your RC Just drill the heck out of LG (focus on the setup at the beginning, this is crucial) and you will be fine! Are you running out of time or making improper inferences?

Second PT today, first five-section PT. Haven't studied since I took the mostly-cold diagnostic about a week ago.

PT 38 (October 2002): 172

LG (Experimental taken from the Powerscore Logic Games Bible): -5
LR #1: -2
LG: -6
RC: -1
LR #2: -1

"Semi-blind" review: 176 (No BR for LR or RC, partial BR for the LG. Made a passable diagram for the first game, which solved most of the absurd mistakes I made during the test--if I had done a full BR, I might have added more points.)

Go figure. Does this discrepancy make sense to anyone?

Note: I have heard that the most recent tests are more difficult than older ones. That may be true, but I expected to do much worse on #38 than on #65, because older tests supposedly have harder LGs.

kylemolodets wrote:Are you running out of time or making improper inferences?

Both.

I was in a similar situation, and the best thing you can do is a lot of drilling. Like at least an hour per day, 4+ times per week. Get the Cambridge packets and do every game multiple times. I went from missing half of the LG questions on my diagnostic to going -1 on test day.