Top Law Schools

Flaw questions are so numerous that it's to one's advantage to be proficient in that question type.

9 out of 10 times I can pick out the flaw and quickly select the right answer. I try to find answers that mirror the premises and conclusions when I cannot determine the flaw. Are there any solid tips or shortcuts when one cannot pick out the flaw?

I also believe some extent this can apply to certain parallel question types when paralleling the flaw.

I think answer choices are the most transparent to eliminate in flaw questions, so I would head there.
Why are they the most obvious? Because they're the same types over and over again.
If I don't see a rather clear flaw, I'll look over each choice and assess.

Has there been a term shift? Did the author mention one word twice, but with different meanings?
Does the author attack another entity making a claim instead of directing attention at the argument itself?
Is the author not really making an argument and just going back and forth with circular reasoning?
Perhaps the person is ignoring the content of an argument and simply making it easier to challenge via straw man?

In this sense, working from wrong to right for flaws seems more obvious than for other types.

SunDevil14 wrote:Flaw questions are so numerous that it's to one's advantage to be proficient in that question type.

9 out of 10 times I can pick out the flaw and quickly select the right answer. I try to find answers that mirror the premises and conclusions when I cannot determine the flaw. Are there any solid tips or shortcuts when one cannot pick out the flaw?

I also believe some extent this can apply to certain parallel question types when paralleling the flaw.

You're right about how important Flaw questions are - they are the single most common LR question type, with an average of 8 questions per test. Not to mention that the skills involved in correctly deducing a flaw are involved in several other question types, like Strengthen/Weaken and Assumption questions.

The best way to approach flaw questions is to try and anticipate what the flaw is by separating the premises and conclusion, and asking yourself: what is missing? Why is it that the premises don't support/guarantee this conclusion? Practice analyzing the gap, and you'll be less likely to fall for tempting answers that seem relevant, but are a bit off. This is especially relevant on the more difficult questions, where it isn't enough to eliminate obvious wrong answers - you need to understand the argument well to be able to eliminate the tricky ones.