Q11

[MatthewG662]

I can solve this, but it takes me forever. Any tips on how to solve this, and problems like it, efficiently?

[ohthatpatrick]

There are some tips, but don’t confuse the takeaway:
This type of question is usually much harder than an average question. (Orientation questions are usually much easier than an average question) We should remain aware of this tendency.

For a lot of us (myself included), we just skip Equivalent Rule questions when we see them and save them until the end.

If/when we do them, the easiest / quickest eliminations will always be
Use previous work to get rid of answer choices.
Each answer provides a rule. If you can find a previous scenario you did that is a counterexample to that rule, then you can eliminate that answer.

Once you get past that, you’re essentially trying to figure out whether the new rule “does the work” of the previous rule. Does it force the same reality, or can you follow the new rule but break the old rule?

Finally, there are two big trends for how correct answers work:

#1 trend:
If the rule deals with two characters, say X and Y, one of those characters will be intertwined with some other character in the game.

for ex: X – Y and WY

If we were replacing “X – Y”, we would notice that Y is intertwined with W and we’d expect the equivalent rule would be one relating to X to W. A correct answer could be “X – W” and it would have the same effect as “X – Y”.


#2 trend:
The effect of the rule is restated in "upside down Inference syntax".

If you have six characters, like J K L M N O, and you know that K, M, N, and O all come after J, the correct answer might say "Only L can come before J".

If you have five spots, and M has to go in spots 1, 3, or 5, the correct answer might say "M cannot go in spots 2 or 4"

If you have six characters, like J K L M N O, and having J in means that K, N, and O are out, the correct answer might say "Only L and M can be in with J".


R S T U W X Z

Okay, onto this specific one.
T can't be 1.
T _ _ W
~(SZ), ~(WX)
(UX)

From 7, we had a scenarios like
X U T (z/s, R) W s/z
X U s/z T (z/s, R) W

From 8, we had
z/s T U X W (s/z, R)
z/s X U T (s/z, R) W

From 9, we had
S T X U W R Z
(U, X) T (S, R) W Z
(S, R) T X U W Z

Using previous work we could get rid of
(A) Q7
(B)
(C)
(D) Q8
(E) Q8

So we'd only have to use real brain power on (B) and (C).

We'd be asking ourselves, "Does this do the same work?" (i.e. does this prevent T from being in spot 1?

(B) Yes! If W can't be 4, then T can't be 1, since T __ __ W means that if T were 1, W would be 4. This is our answer.

(C) X can't be 6? Doesn't seem like that has any obvious effect on T being in 1st. Can we follow this new rule but break the original rule?

Sure:
T X U W S R Z

This scenario was not legal before but it's legal under (C)'s rule, so (C) apparently is not providing an equivalent rule.

======

Ultimately, (B) is one of the easiest answers LSAT has provided for this type of question. It follows the #1 trend:

We're being asked to replace a rule about T, so we ask ourselves, "Is T intimately bound up with any other character in this game?"

Yes! T is always exactly 3 spots before W. So we'd anticipate that the correct answer might re-write the T rule in terms of W. That's just what it does.

Hope this helps.