Old LR vs Newer LR Forum

[gopack24377]

I regularly go -0/-2 in old LR sections timed, but average -4/-6 in the newer sections. I just took PT60, isn't really a pattern to the wrong answers. I think I may need to have an even clearer understanding of the logical constructs. Has anyone else noticed increased difficulty of later LR? any suggestions

[Pozzo]

I agree that the stimulus in new LR sections tend to be longer/more complex than the older tests. However, the fundamentals are the same, and the questions are still asking the same thing. Like all things LSAT, keep practicing and drilling newer LR sections until you get more comfortable with it.

[em15]

The concentration of different question types seems to also change a bit over time, so pay attention to that. Especially focus on that when you take the PT's in the past year or two

[connordalto]

I regularly go -0/-2 in old LR sections timed, but average -4/-6 in the newer sections. I just took PT60, isn't really a pattern to the wrong answers. I think I may need to have an even clearer understanding of the logical constructs. Has anyone else noticed increased difficulty of later LR? any suggestions

Id emphasize: 1. Knowing causality 100%, 2. Principle Qs, resolve the paradox, and Flaws, and 3. Being able to handle tough science questions. Seemed to be a lot of the above on the sept/dec tests.

[Blueprint Mithun]

I regularly go -0/-2 in old LR sections timed, but average -4/-6 in the newer sections. I just took PT60, isn't really a pattern to the wrong answers. I think I may need to have an even clearer understanding of the logical constructs. Has anyone else noticed increased difficulty of later LR? any suggestions

I agree with what Pozzo said - LR stimuli have definitely gotten a bit longer and denser in more recent years, but you're ultimately dealing with the same types of questions. The same approaches that worked on older questions will work here, it's just a matter of putting in practice and getting accustomed to slightly longer, potentially more complex arguments. Don't let it psych you out - make sure you work through the preptests past 60, and you'll start to find yourself getting used to the changes in style.

[AJordan]

Not all that glitters is gold. For instance, PT29's LR sections are, imo, brutal. It seems they start with marginally difficult questions as well which makes you question your sanity. I went -1/-4 on them and legit felt like 2 of the answers were bullshit even after understanding why they are right. Normally that happens to me about once every three PTs. Two on the same test made me want to pull my hair out.

[SunDevil14]

I agree that the stimulus in new LR sections tend to be longer/more complex than the older tests. However, the fundamentals are the same, and the questions are still asking the same thing. Like all things LSAT, keep practicing and drilling newer LR sections until you get more comfortable with it.

I agree. All things being equal, the new tests are slightly harder than their older counterparts. The test makers are compensating for an overabundance of prep material/companies.

[AJordan]

Just did test 30 and I'm pretty sure it's the hardest set of LG questions I've ever done.

[etramak]

I agree the newer tests are more difficult, but I think this is reflected more in the reading comprehension than the LR.

[j.a.p.1440]

Just did test 30 and I'm pretty sure it's the hardest set of LG questions I've ever done.

Weird, I did the same set not too long ago and I didn't find it too bad. Yet, for PT 66, I found the LG section in that test to be some of the hardest I have ever done. I simple one layer, 7 slot games turned into a complete nightmare.

I wonder if certain tests just agree better with certain people?

[appind]

new LR in 60s and 70s has some subtlety to it that's not seen in older LR. many people experience a drop in score in newer LR compared to older LR.