How relevant are LG in tests 20-30?

[seb266]

(see above)

[cyruswhittaker]

I think they are very relevant. I notice that a lot of the older preptests (before 20) had pattern games, but I haven't seen those come up in the later PT that I've done.

Two games from this group stand out especially: the golf/tennis game in June 1998 in PT 25, and game #4 from September 1998 (lawmakers/scientists).

[interestedintacos]

My question is this. Is it true the easier games on pt 40s give way to harder games from 57 and on? If so, are these harder games on the level of pt 20-30 or closer to pt 40s but more difficult? are there specific tips for the latest of the latest games other than the tips on rule equivalency questions? An explanation as to the increased difficulty?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

My question is this. Is it true the easier games on pt 40s give way to harder games from 57 and on? If so, are these harder games on the level of pt 20-30 or closer to pt 40s but more difficult? are there specific tips for the latest of the latest games other than the tips on rule equivalency questions? An explanation as to the increased difficulty?

"Harder" is somewhat subjective since what is "hard" for one person may not be "hard" for another. Frequently I see students who do great on Binary Grouping games, but then struggle on Relative Ordering - not something I would expect to see.

But with that caveat, I would say that we went through a weak period on games, where they became a bit predictable and overall scores were on the rise. This seems to have been corrected and we seem to have come back to the difficulty level of the mid to late 90s.

The latest games, like most games of the past, reward flexibility. There's also been a steep rise in Relative Ordering games and they've been playing around with multiple ways of creating maps of relationships (what we call the Tree) within a single game.

And you're correct about that new question at the end of some logic games that asks to substitute one rule for another without changing the constraints of the game. To prove the correct answer can take a bit of time, but wrong answers there are typically quick to eliminate and can be easier to spot than verifying the correct answer.

Hope that helps!

[interestedintacos]

I'm assuming this change was either coupled with a slightly easier reading comprehension section and/or a more forgiving curve, though?

These tests in the 40s with easier logic games seem to have pretty strict curves that reflect that, and from what I've seen the latest tests with the reputation for harder games have more forgiving curves.

I'm also assuming the pure sequencing stuff you're talking about is like the MLSAT challenge game? Or are we talking about other twists like "A is greater than OR equal to B"?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Yep, we've seen curves that represent the somewhat more difficult games. And I'd say that overall the RC has come down a bit in difficulty but, not a lot. Everything is shifting around within a range that is normal. So while we can discuss slight shifts in difficulty, none of it is something that should be seen as "out of the norm."

For the relative ordering, you can look at PT51, S4, G2 to get a sense for what I mean. This is a slight twist that involves multiple Relative Ordering Trees.

[interestedintacos]

Also I noticed the latest tests have 23 LG questions as opposed to 22 in the 40s and 24 in the 20s-30s (of what I remember).