RE: December Sabbath LSAT. WHICH RC was real?! Forum

[Ar40]

My first RC was pretty difficult. It involved the woman's suffrage movement. Second section was WAY easier. Started with topic involving body building.


Edit: Removed extraneous questions. I posted a similar question at the October Saturday LSAT and there was nothing wrong with it. Trying to figure out which RC was real. Also wrote my question in a more vague way

[Clearly]

This is not allowed. I recommend just removing your whole post.

[Ar40]

I re-wrote it to be more vague.

[Ar40]

RC2 had an article on a female lacquer artist as well, against Art Noveau, external and internal harmony in art, etc.

I remember an article about German evolution theory. "NaturaPhilosoph" or something in german. How higher and lower life forms share traits... And real money vs. compensatory in contract agreements.

If any of these ring a bell, I'd prolly be able to figure out which RC was real...

[pattyesq]

Haha AR, you and I keep having the same test. I'd like to know too!

[Ar40]

That 4th logic game tho. SHEER murder/torture.

NEVER seen one like it on ANY practice LSAT. Wowzers.

[pattyesq]

I had 15 minutes left for the fourth game. I suspected it would be horrible. I've seen a couple of don't say the kind of game. What did you think of the first LR?

[Ar40]

Both LRs, ESPECIALLY the second one felt VERY easy. Finished the second with 2 minutes to spare. Usually doesn't happen for me. I thought the LR2 was going to be experimental with an LR3, that's how easy it felt. The first 20 were like the first 10 on regular tests. Must be to make up for the killer LG.

First LR I felt there were some tricky questions in the first 10. A bit harder than LR2. Like a typical LR section.

Don't talk about the kind of game.

[pattyesq]

I totally agree LR2 was easy. I think I had trouble with LR1 because it was the first section of the test and I couldn't focus. As well as there were, I agree, difficult questions in the first ten, so I couldn't even warm up! I usually go -6 combined on LR, and I really think I went -5 on the first section lolz.

[pattyesq]

Stop

[Ar40]

I totally agree LR2 was easy. I think I had trouble with LR1 because it was the first section of the test and I couldn't focus. As well as there were, I agree, difficult questions in the first ten, so I couldn't even warm up! I usually go -6 combined on LR, and I really think I went -5 on the first section lolz.

ORLY? LR1 for you? I had RC as my first section! And body building as final section! And RC2.

Maybe that indicates the RC1 with woman's suffrage was the fake?

[pattyesq]

I don't know haha. Mine was LR-RC-LG-RC-LR. I wouldn't make assumptions based on the order. I really wish someone who didn't have two Rc sections could help us figure this out

[Dave118]

I had RC,AR,LR,LR,RC - on my test booklet was stamped CGLR - I'm thinking that may mean Comprehension, Games,Logical,Reasoning indicating that my RC2 was experimental? My RC2 had an article that contrasted different types of court remedies

[Dave118]

Also remembering an article about fear of wilderness - think that was in RC2

[Ar40]

Yeah I had the exact same order as you, Dave.

Right on that the second RC had an article about neanderthals clearing the woods NOT for hunting purposes, rather for spiritual wilderness spooky reasons. LOL.

I'm betting you're right and RC2 (which was WAY easier. I loved the muscle memory/body builder, and neanderthal articles.) was the experimental. No way would RC be that enjoyable.

[StopLawying]

My friend just finished and he said this test was really difficult, especially LG. Everyone has been complaining about LG recently; so much for it being the easiest section.

[pattyesq]

Supposedly, the lacquer artist/architect topic was included in the experimental RC for the February 2015 test. What does this mean?

[Clearly]

I had RC,AR,LR,LR,RC - on my test booklet was stamped CGLR - I'm thinking that may mean Comprehension, Games,Logical,Reasoning indicating that my RC2 was experimental? My RC2 had an article that contrasted different types of court remedies

They would never stamp the book in a way that could indicate the experimental. However your last section was almost certainly real. Only once in the history of the lsat has an experimental section been after the break.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Also a reminder, don't talk about what kind of games. Topic (modern art, Neanderthals) is fine. Not the category of game.

[pattyesq]

Sorry, didn't know that wasn't allowed, considering that both Powerscore blog posts and 7sage discussions have been stating the category of the game for the non-Sabbath December test, but I won't mention it again.

[Ar40]

Supposedly, the lacquer artist/architect topic was included in the experimental RC for the February 2015 test. What does this mean?

2015? This past year? Dang! I bet that means it's the real one. I've seen at least 3 instances of LSAC re-using old experimental individual sections for future Sabbath/Overseas tests. (Same thing happened with this year's London RC, I believe. It was based on Feb. 2013) Also as it was the second RC section, like the earlier posted said.

If RC2 is real, I'm going to jump for joy. That easily improves my score by 3/4 points (I feel like I bombed RC1). Might be able to get me over the dismal LG4.

[Ar40]

OK. Case CLOSED. definitively.

RC1 was fake. RC2 real.

My RC1 started with women's suffrage intersecting with African American rights. Had a German evolutionary theory article. A legal article I can't for the life of me remember.

Someone else's RC1 involved "Brainstorming", "Mexican photographer", "Reality of Species".

But we BOTH had the same passages for RC2:


Therefore, RC2 with bodybuilding/Muscle Memory, compensatory contracts, lacquer, and Neanderthal Forest Fear is REAL.

Excellent sleuthing, guys!

(I should've realized RC1 was fake when the first article - usually the easiest- took me incredibly long to do (10 minutes), and had incredibly difficult answer choices)

[Dave118]

AR40 - Do you mind if I ask your credentials? You seem to know a lot about recent tests and the LSAT statistics in general. I'm only asking because I'd like to rely on your conclusion. I messed up really bad on RC1 but did well on RC2 and I'm deciding whether or not to cancel my score. Rest of my test was good.

[Ar40]

I was PM'ing someone else who took this test. Our RC1s don't match up. Our RC2s are identical.

That definitively means RC2 is real. All tests can be determined this way to find the experimental section (Everyone on here will agree with this, it's fairly common knowledge IMHO). Bodybuilder/neanderthal section is REAL.


I messed up on RC1 as well. I wouldn't cancel.

[pattyesq]

Dave, just to clarify, my RC1 definitely contained a topic on brainstorming (it was the last passage for RC1). My RC2 contained a topic on bodybuilding and muscle memory. I don't remember a topic on women's suffrage rights/African American rights.

And yes, it was February 2015 of this year for the lacquer/artist turned architect passage. If you do a google search, you'll find people talking about it on the reddit LSAT page.