Top Law Schools

I've been studying for about 5 weeks now, plan on taking the September test.

My complete PT history has been this:

163 (diagnostic)
176 PT 29
177 PT 30
173 PT 31
175 PT 32
177 PT 33
176 PT 34
173 PT 35

Average: 175.3

If anything, I'm consistent... everything has been between 173-177. But there's no clear trend in my scores, for better or for worse. I tend to get between -1 to -4 on each section, with a -0 every once and a while. My wrong answers don't adhere to a particular type, although I've noticed about half are due to stupid mistakes (not reading all answer choices, missing a word in the question stem, etc) and half are due to a true lack of understanding.

After each test I go over my wrong answers, and really try to understand why I got them wrong by reading the Manhattan forums and watching 7sage explanations. This doesn't seem to be helping much, as I continue to get roughly the same amount wrong every PT.

Any advice? Have I reached my cap?

Do you BR? There isn't much you can really do to improve at this point in terms of understanding the test, especially if your mistakes often come from focusing/rushing errors. I had the same diagnostic as you and haven't taken a second test yet... Here's to hoping I'm doing whatever you did

Oh, also maybe take some really recent tests. Some people say they've changed. I'd make sure that doesn't affect your score

maybeman wrote:Oh, also maybe take some really recent tests. Some people say they've changed. I'd make sure that doesn't affect your score

I plan on taking more 5 section PTs from 60-present as I get closer to the real thing.

I don't really BR because I usually have between 3-5 minutes at the end of each section to run back and check the couple answers I'm not sure of. The questions I get wrong are those I thought was sure of but missed, or when even after reviewing I can't decide definitely between two possibilites and pick the wrong one.

Replitz wrote:

maybeman wrote:Oh, also maybe take some really recent tests. Some people say they've changed. I'd make sure that doesn't affect your score

I plan on taking more 5 section PTs from 60-present as I get closer to the real thing.

I don't really BR because I usually have between 3-5 minutes at the end of each section to run back and check the couple answers I'm not sure of. The questions I get wrong are those I thought was sure of but missed, or when even after reviewing I can't decide definitely between two possibilites and pick the wrong one.

Makes sense. This would be an issue if you weren't already absolutely killing it, so I have nothing more to give haha. Good luck maintaining

Good lord, talk about a good problem to have. My best score so far on practice tests is a 168 >_<

Replitz wrote:I've been studying for about 5 weeks now, plan on taking the September test.

My complete PT history has been this:

163 (diagnostic)
176 PT 29
177 PT 30
173 PT 31
175 PT 32
177 PT 33
176 PT 34
173 PT 35

Average: 175.3

If anything, I'm consistent... everything has been between 173-177. But there's no clear trend in my scores, for better or for worse. I tend to get between -1 to -4 on each section, with a -0 every once and a while. My wrong answers don't adhere to a particular type, although I've noticed about half are due to stupid mistakes (not reading all answer choices, missing a word in the question stem, etc) and half are due to a true lack of understanding.

After each test I go over my wrong answers, and really try to understand why I got them wrong by reading the Manhattan forums and watching 7sage explanations. This doesn't seem to be helping much, as I continue to get roughly the same amount wrong every PT.

Any advice? Have I reached my cap?

This is great. Maybe you are making these small mistakes because you are going too fast.
what about the new pt tests? have you tried any of them to see how much will you get.

Hey by the way, just out of curiosity, I wonder what did you use as preparation for the test

Replitz wrote:

maybeman wrote:Oh, also maybe take some really recent tests. Some people say they've changed. I'd make sure that doesn't affect your score

I plan on taking more 5 section PTs from 60-present as I get closer to the real thing.

I don't really BR because I usually have between 3-5 minutes at the end of each section to run back and check the couple answers I'm not sure of. The questions I get wrong are those I thought was sure of but missed, or when even after reviewing I can't decide definitely between two possibilites and pick the wrong one.

I noticed that Kaplan LSAT 2015 Strategies, Practice, and Review have 4 real tests in the end with 5 sections and they don't tell you which section is the experimental until you finish them all, of course they tell you before hand that one of the section is from pt 46 for example and the the rest are from 52.

They have the book at my public library, so if you can go to your public library and check if they have it. Maybe then you can borrow the book and use it for these 5 sections tests, but of course you can always erase any pencil marks you leave after the test.

Replitz wrote:I've been studying for about 5 weeks now, plan on taking the September test.

My complete PT history has been this:

163 (diagnostic)
176 PT 29
177 PT 30
173 PT 31
175 PT 32
177 PT 33
176 PT 34
173 PT 35

Average: 175.3

If anything, I'm consistent... everything has been between 173-177. But there's no clear trend in my scores, for better or for worse. I tend to get between -1 to -4 on each section, with a -0 every once and a while. My wrong answers don't adhere to a particular type, although I've noticed about half are due to stupid mistakes (not reading all answer choices, missing a word in the question stem, etc) and half are due to a true lack of understanding.

After each test I go over my wrong answers, and really try to understand why I got them wrong by reading the Manhattan forums and watching 7sage explanations. This doesn't seem to be helping much, as I continue to get roughly the same amount wrong every PT.

Any advice? Have I reached my cap?

Wow you're smart as hell to be PT'ing in the mid 170s consistently after just over a month of prep. Some advice to increase score:

-Your LG is definitely a score you can get perfect on. If you're missing -1 to -4 on those sections then cut out a week to go back over all types of LG games and get that tightened up. From this alone you can shore up 2 or so points which will help.


-RC --- Not much to say here except for make sure you focus on the readings. You don't need to outline the passages or notate them, but like IMMERSE yourself in the reading as if you're reading the most riveting chapter of your favorite novel right at its climax. I'm emphasizing this because although we technically read the RC passages, sometimes we're just not really 'in tune' with the passage. Like you didn't zone out or forget what you were reading, but it didn't really SINK in the way you needed it to. You know what I'm talking about. Make sure EVERY RC passage SINKS IN. Your goal should be to be fully educated about that RC passage by the time you go to the questions. Its even worth taking the extra 30 seconds to re read some paragraphs if you don't think you got it.

-LR ---Start charting what kinds of problems you get wrong on future PTs (assumption, conclusion, flaw in reasoning etc.). If you see any discernible pattern then hammer out some prep on those questions and focus on the concepts needed to get those questions right, no slack. In the intermediate, when you're reviewing your exam and you're going back over a question you got wrong -- google the question and look for a textbook reason for why the right answer is the right answer. Don't just look at the right answer and be like "Oh I get why that should've been right" and move on. Break down that question and engineer the logic behind it and know on a super fundamental level why the right answer was right.


******Here's another secret technique for LR that hasn't been shared on these boards before, but helps a LOT and I hope everyone reading this catches this.


It takes a lot of work, but if you're willing to do it then you will reap HUGE rewards and gains in LR.

1.) Do a PT LR section.
2.) Don't BR, just check your answers.
3.) Regardless of your score, go through each and every single question.
4.) On every question, write/type down why each wrong answer was wrong. Walk yourself through the logic of why answers A, C, D, E couldn't have been right in YOUR WORDS.
5.) Write down why the correct answer was correct in YOUR WORDS.

And I mean do this for every single question in the section. It might take you a couple hours, but I promise those two hours will serve you better than 5 hours of just straight prep testing. It will force you to identify and dissect why each wrong answer is wrong. Sometimes we guess answers in test prep and when we check our section afterwards and see that we got it right, we just shrug our shoulders and keep moving. Or sometimes we forget which question was even a point of contention for us and don't bother to further investigate those check marks we have.

If you want a perfect score on LR, you should be able to review an entire section using my above method without getting stuck. If you encounter a problem where you can't really explain why certain answers are definitively wrong/right, then google up a breakdown of the question. If you're doing 90's PTs then there's more than likely a completely shelled out explanation for the problem already -- especially if its a difficult one.

Its a lot of work, but if you're serious about doing better on LR then you'll do it. LG, on the other hand, is sheer practice. If you're missing ANY points on LG then you need to keep practicing. Most students do 100% on LG when its untimed (exception of some who need to get their ducks in a row first). The errors come from timed practice. If you're still making errors then it might be time to adjust your notation methods. You finishing in time doesn't necessarily indicate that you don't need to find better ways to shave time off. Ask yourself if you're really getting a quality look at each question. If you're feeling like you have to rush and you don't have time to figure out whether a question is right or wrong then you need to work on your timing. My advice would be to start drilling the LG section with 32 minutes instead of 35. Start with 34 minutes then try to drop your time to 33 then eventually to 32. This will force you to have to develop better methods and become more familiar with quick outlines and notation methods to drop your time down.

Even though your score is high you've still only been studying 5 weeks so your score may continue to increase by virtue of just becoming more and more familiar with the exam. But don't just keep hammering out PT after PT without some very serious thorough analysis on each section you take. You should be able to give a lecture on each LR problem, each LG game and each RC passage. If you want to increase from the mid 170's then the only place you can really go is 180 and that's going to take a mastery of this stuff, straight up. Put the work in and you'll be there.


Good luck.

Replitz wrote:

maybeman wrote:Oh, also maybe take some really recent tests. Some people say they've changed. I'd make sure that doesn't affect your score

I plan on taking more 5 section PTs from 60-present as I get closer to the real thing.

I don't really BR because I usually have between 3-5 minutes at the end of each section to run back and check the couple answers I'm not sure of. The questions I get wrong are those I thought was sure of but missed, or when even after reviewing I can't decide definitely between two possibilites and pick the wrong one.

Never let one of those questions ride. Take as much time as you have to in order to figure out why you were wrong. I know I'm being a pain in the ass and what I'm suggesting is tedious as hell, but if you want to elevate from such a high point then you can't use the same measures that students in the 150s and 160s use to advance their score. You're well beyond that at this point. Improvement here is going to take a meticulous and brutally honest assessment of your performance after each section and a lengthy and thorough inspection of your flaws as well as correct answers to try to catch any deficiencies you may have on anything. Essentially, your bar has to rise to perfection at this point because at mid 170's, I can't imagine you're getting more than 1-2 a section wrong, if that. So improvement from there is -0 sections.

-0 sections require you to intuitively know exactly why the LSAT thinkers believe things are right or wrong. Your way of believing why things are right or wrong is good enough to do -1 or -2. To get those two annoying questions that you look back and review and think "Why the fuck did I get this wrong?" or "Why in the world would they say C is right? D is a great answer!", you have to understand very intuitively how they think. This is where your due diligence and resilience is going to come in, because this may involve you dissecting a question (in review) for 20+ minutes until you finally work it down to the point where you understand why the test makers said your answer was wrong and their choice was right. If you don't reverse engineer it down to its basics like that then you will always get those questions wrong. Always. Don't ignore them assuming that they're an aberration on the exam, because they aren't. You're going to run into them EVERY LR section. You might luck out on a -0 every now and then, assuming you have at all, at this point. But until you reverse engineer those problems and understand on the most minute atomic fundamental level why the LSAT thinkers believe their question is the right answer and the only right answer, then you're doomed to stagnation from here.


I wish there were an easier answer but there isn't. There's not going to be any simple, quick or easy tips to raise your score from here. Improvement is going to require doing some annoyingly lengthy shit and actually spending the time to figure out the wrong answers that other student say "Meh, fuck that question" to as they repeatedly get it wrong every section. Every wrong answer must alarm you at this point and your attention to it should not be constrained by any time. When you're reviewing, review your wrong answers until you KNOW why they're wrong. NO EXCEPTIONS. I don't care if it takes 15 minutes, 30 minutes, an hour, or even all day or you have to spend the rest of the day doing it and come back tomorrow and figure it out. Don't you let one more wrong answer sit out in the universe without you being able to write a paragraph on why every damn answer was wrong and why their answer was right. If you can't figure it out then come to these forums for help, we'll take a crack at it with you.

Another piece of advice (sorry I'm saying a lot! But I want you to get a 180): Don't resist their logic. I know for myself its tempting to look at the explanation for why a certain answer choice is right and I'll think "That's bullshit. How could they say that?" and I'll wrestle in my head about. I used to say to myself "These guys got the answer wrong." They don't get the answers wrong. Never assume that or think it. You must assume their answer is right and I need to see why this is absolutely right and I need to study it until I completely agree and can replicate it on a comparable problem.

maybeman wrote:Oh, also maybe take some really recent tests. Some people say they've changed. I'd make sure that doesn't affect your score

Agree. Especially for LR, the test reflect trends in recent development of society, such as biotechnology. I think this makes sense since legal practice has to evolve with society, too.
Some common confusing tactics to trick test takers are gone. New ones have shown up.

DragonWell wrote:

maybeman wrote:Oh, also maybe take some really recent tests. Some people say they've changed. I'd make sure that doesn't affect your score

Agree. Especially for LR, the test reflect trends in recent development of society, such as biotechnology. I think this makes sense since legal practice has to evolve with society, too.
Some common confusing tactics to trick test takers are gone. New ones have shown up.

This.

MyNameIsntJames wrote:

Replitz wrote:

maybeman wrote:Oh, also maybe take some really recent tests. Some people say they've changed. I'd make sure that doesn't affect your score

I plan on taking more 5 section PTs from 60-present as I get closer to the real thing.

I don't really BR because I usually have between 3-5 minutes at the end of each section to run back and check the couple answers I'm not sure of. The questions I get wrong are those I thought was sure of but missed, or when even after reviewing I can't decide definitely between two possibilites and pick the wrong one.

Never let one of those questions ride. Take as much time as you have to in order to figure out why you were wrong. I know I'm being a pain in the ass and what I'm suggesting is tedious as hell, but if you want to elevate from such a high point then you can't use the same measures that students in the 150s and 160s use to advance their score. You're well beyond that at this point. Improvement here is going to take a meticulous and brutally honest assessment of your performance after each section and a lengthy and thorough inspection of your flaws as well as correct answers to try to catch any deficiencies you may have on anything. Essentially, your bar has to rise to perfection at this point because at mid 170's, I can't imagine you're getting more than 1-2 a section wrong, if that. So improvement from there is -0 sections.

-0 sections require you to intuitively know exactly why the LSAT thinkers believe things are right or wrong. Your way of believing why things are right or wrong is good enough to do -1 or -2. To get those two annoying questions that you look back and review and think "Why the fuck did I get this wrong?" or "Why in the world would they say C is right? D is a great answer!", you have to understand very intuitively how they think. This is where your due diligence and resilience is going to come in, because this may involve you dissecting a question (in review) for 20+ minutes until you finally work it down to the point where you understand why the test makers said your answer was wrong and their choice was right. If you don't reverse engineer it down to its basics like that then you will always get those questions wrong. Always. Don't ignore them assuming that they're an aberration on the exam, because they aren't. You're going to run into them EVERY LR section. You might luck out on a -0 every now and then, assuming you have at all, at this point. But until you reverse engineer those problems and understand on the most minute atomic fundamental level why the LSAT thinkers believe their question is the right answer and the only right answer, then you're doomed to stagnation from here.


I wish there were an easier answer but there isn't. There's not going to be any simple, quick or easy tips to raise your score from here. Improvement is going to require doing some annoyingly lengthy shit and actually spending the time to figure out the wrong answers that other student say "Meh, fuck that question" to as they repeatedly get it wrong every section. Every wrong answer must alarm you at this point and your attention to it should not be constrained by any time. When you're reviewing, review your wrong answers until you KNOW why they're wrong. NO EXCEPTIONS. I don't care if it takes 15 minutes, 30 minutes, an hour, or even all day or you have to spend the rest of the day doing it and come back tomorrow and figure it out. Don't you let one more wrong answer sit out in the universe without you being able to write a paragraph on why every damn answer was wrong and why their answer was right. If you can't figure it out then come to these forums for help, we'll take a crack at it with you.

Another piece of advice (sorry I'm saying a lot! But I want you to get a 180): Don't resist their logic. I know for myself its tempting to look at the explanation for why a certain answer choice is right and I'll think "That's bullshit. How could they say that?" and I'll wrestle in my head about. I used to say to myself "These guys got the answer wrong." They don't get the answers wrong. Never assume that or think it. You must assume their answer is right and I need to see why this is absolutely right and I need to study it until I completely agree and can replicate it on a comparable problem.

Wow. Thank you for your detailed advice!! It was seriously helpful. My motivation was dwindling after hitting the same score over and over... but I'm going to take your recommendations to heart. Today I'm going to do some LR sections and spend as much time as necessary going over why answers are right and wrong. I'm going to go back through old sections and do the same thing.

Sometimes when I'm doing LR, I'll cross out a word or underline a word that disqualifies an answer- just a way to keep track of my reasoning. I will go through some LR sections untimed and do this on every question until I can consistently get -0.

In regards to more recent PTs, I plan on doing 5 section PTs from more recent tests (60-75) in the 6 weeks leading up to the exam. These exams will be strictly under test conditions - bubbling in answers, no extra breaks, using the full 15 minutes to go to the bathroom, doing warmups in the morning, etc. Let's 180 this bitch.

FayRays wrote:

Replitz wrote:I've been studying for about 5 weeks now, plan on taking the September test.

My complete PT history has been this:

163 (diagnostic)
176 PT 29
177 PT 30
173 PT 31
175 PT 32
177 PT 33
176 PT 34
173 PT 35

Average: 175.3

If anything, I'm consistent... everything has been between 173-177. But there's no clear trend in my scores, for better or for worse. I tend to get between -1 to -4 on each section, with a -0 every once and a while. My wrong answers don't adhere to a particular type, although I've noticed about half are due to stupid mistakes (not reading all answer choices, missing a word in the question stem, etc) and half are due to a true lack of understanding.

After each test I go over my wrong answers, and really try to understand why I got them wrong by reading the Manhattan forums and watching 7sage explanations. This doesn't seem to be helping much, as I continue to get roughly the same amount wrong every PT.

Any advice? Have I reached my cap?

This is great. Maybe you are making these small mistakes because you are going too fast.
what about the new pt tests? have you tried any of them to see how much will you get.

Hey by the way, just out of curiosity, I wonder what did you use as preparation for the test

I keep a log of every single study session. Here's what I've been doing:

6/5 12:00 PM 1:20 PM 1:20 Powerscore logic bible
6/5 3:30 PM 6:00 PM 2:30 Powerscore logic bible
6/6 8:00 PM 9:20 PM 1:20 Powerscore logic bible
6/17 12:00 PM 4:42 PM 4:42 Diagnostic, score: 163
6/19 1:50 PM 6:27 PM 4:37 PT 40 Review, logic games drilling on PT 39
6/20 5:55 PM 7:30 PM 1:35 PT 29 Logic Games 1-2
6/23 1:36 PM 4:50 PM 3:14 PT 29 Logic Games 1-4, PT 30 Logic Games 1-2
6/27 7:30 PM 9:00 PM 1:30 PT 30 Logic Games 1-4
6/28 7:30 PM 8:30 PM 1:00 PT 31 LG 1-2
6/28 9:30 PM 9:55 PM 0:25 PT 31 LG 1-2
6/29 6:50 PM 9:07 PM 2:17 PT 31 LG 3-4, PT 32 LG 1-4
6/30 10:15 AM 11:15 AM 1:00 PT32 LG 4, PT33 LG 1
6/30 11:40 AM 11:56 AM 0:16 PT 33 LG 2
6/30 3:15 PM 5:00 PM 1:45 PT 33 LG 3-4, PT 34 LG 1-2
7/5 11:10 AM 12:10 PM 1:00 PT 34 1-4
7/5 12:30 PM 2:15 PM 1:45 PT 34 4, PT 35 LG 1-4
7/6 11:40 AM 1:20 PM 1:40 PT 36 LG 1-4
7/6 2:45 PM 3:45 PM 1:00 PT 37 LG 1-4
7/6 4:20 PM 5:34 PM 1:14 PT 38 LG 1-4
7/7 10:20 AM 2:13 PM 3:53 Drilling 34(4), 36(3), 37(3), 37(4), 39(1-4), 40(1-4)
7/7 2:22 PM 3:00 PM 0:38 29 (1-2) (-0)
7/8 10:02 AM 12:47 PM 2:45 29 (3-4) (-3), 30 (1-4), 31 (1-4)
7/8 2:20 PM 2:50 PM 0:30
7/12 11:10 AM 1:30 PM 2:20 31 3-4 Warmup, 33(1-4), LR Book 1-35
7/12 2:40 PM 4:30 PM 1:50 LR Book 36-80
7/13 9:26 AM 9:55 AM 0:29
7/13 10:20 AM 11:45 AM 1:25 LR Book 80-92
7/13 3:37 PM 4:00 PM 0:23
7/13 4:34 PM 5:03 PM 0:29 LR Book 92-End
7/13 6:12 PM 9:10 PM 2:58 RC Book 1-End, retook June 2003 RC, -1 on question 27 in 29:00
7/14 9:15 AM 12:15 PM 3:00 PT 29 Timed sections 1-3
7/14 1:00 PM 1:55 PM 0:55 PT 29 Timed section 4 and review. Score: 176
7/14 2:30 PM 5:34 PM 3:04 PT 30 Timed, 177
7/15 11:00 AM 12:55 PM 1:55 PT 31 Timed sections 1-2
7/15 1:20 PM 3:25 PM 2:05 PT 31 Timed sections 3-4, Score: 172
7/16 12:30 PM 3:45 PM 3:15 PT 41, Score: 175
7/17 7:30 PM 10:30 PM 3:00 PT 32, Score: 175
7/18 9:45 AM 10:30 AM 0:45 PT 32 BR
7/18 3:30 PM 5:40 PM 2:10 PT 33 1 and 4
7/19 10:30 AM 12:30 PM 2:00 PT 33 2 and 3, Score: 177
7/19 3:45 PM 5:30 PM 1:45 PT 33 1-2
7/20 9:30 AM 11:00 AM 1:30 PT 34 3-4 Need to read every incorrect answer choice, EVERY WORD. Score: 176
7/20 11:36 AM 12:15 PM 0:39 PT 35 1
7/20 2:05 PM 5:00 PM 2:55 PT 35 2-4, Score: 173

.

.

zeglo wrote:I'm not sure what you want? You are getting near-perfect scores good enough for any school. The few questions you miss could just be the fact that it's a hard test with a lot of speed involved. Keep focusing, and you'll kill it.

My GPA is around the 25th percentile for H, maybe a tad lower, so I determine I need at least a 75% percentile LSAT to be a viable splitter applicant. H's 75th is 175, so to be a truly competitive applicant (more than just a tossup) I need a score 176+.

.

zeglo wrote:
FYI I got a 168 this June. It was -0 LG, -2 RC, and -12 LR. So I am not sure if I am the best one to be giving advice. However, my improvement start to finish was around 15 points.

You're a beast, are you retaking? I feel like -12 is easily improved upon in LR even given a 15 point jump

.

HaveMercy wrote:

MyNameIsntJames wrote:

Replitz wrote: 1.) Do a PT LR section.
2.) Don't BR, just check your answers.
3.) Regardless of your score, go through each and every single question.
4.) On every question, write/type down why each wrong answer was wrong. Walk yourself through the logic of why answers A, C, D, E couldn't have been right in YOUR WORDS.
5.) Write down why the correct answer was correct in YOUR WORDS.

Do you recommend this technique over actually BRing every single AC?

I do because it relies on the same process as BR to an even greater extent. With BR you're just checking your answer over again and saying "Yup, that's right to me" and moving on and that's all she wrote. If you check after BR & find you are indeed right then you probably won't even look at that question again. This method forces you to evaluate and shell out each question by choice and method. That could help you a million times more than BR

.

HaveMercy wrote:

MyNameIsntJames wrote:

HaveMercy wrote:

MyNameIsntJames wrote:

Replitz wrote: 1.) Do a PT LR section.
2.) Don't BR, just check your answers.
3.) Regardless of your score, go through each and every single question.
4.) On every question, write/type down why each wrong answer was wrong. Walk yourself through the logic of why answers A, C, D, E couldn't have been right in YOUR WORDS.
5.) Write down why the correct answer was correct in YOUR WORDS.

Do you recommend this technique over actually BRing every single AC?

I do because it relies on the same process as BR to an even greater extent. With BR you're just checking your answer over again and saying "Yup, that's right to me" and moving on and that's all she wrote. If you check after BR & find you are indeed right then you probably won't even look at that question again. This method forces you to evaluate and shell out each question by choice and method. That could help you a million times more than BR

So you specifically go through each AC or do you kinda write a paragraph explaining this to yourself? An example would be really appreciated because I just started BRing after deciding to retake and i'm not sure which technique to carry on with cause this sounds in theory like a good idea

The whole point of BR, and why I disagree with NotJames, is that when you check your ACs and then go back you don't learn how to select correct ACs through your own analysis/intuition to the same extent. There really isn't a "best" way to get better -- the best way is always personal -- so take all of this with a grain of salt.

.

HaveMercy wrote:

maybeman wrote:
The whole point of BR, and why I disagree with NotJames, is that when you check your ACs and then go back you don't learn how to select correct ACs through your own analysis/intuition to the same extent. There really isn't a "best" way to get better -- the best way is always personal -- so take all of this with a grain of salt.

Obviously there is no best way, that's why I am trying to see what works best for me. I just kinda agree with him that many times in my last BR I would be like "that's obviously not it" or "out of scope", which yeah, may be me analyzing it right, but I want to get the most out of it cause I feel like I'm horrible at LR. What would you recommend then? I am a sponge for new ideas.

If you want to go ham, don't circle anything and BR the whole PT/whatever you're doing. While combing back through the questions, pretend like your bubbled AC isn't there -- and don't move onto the next question until you feel 100% sure (or as close as is feasibly possible) on your recheck.