The NoodleyOne's Foolproof Guide to a 179 for Retakers Forum

[Theopliske8711]

In order to attack the Cambridge LRs, do you recommend attacking all of them in a particular type then moving to the next Manhattan LR chapter? For instance, the Nec. and Sufficient Assumption (which is chapter one in the Manhattan) together are something around 250 questions; which will take me a few days to go through. How do you recommend attacking them? The easy ones I almost feel like skipping because of the fact that I did 50 and found one wrong or so, and usually the result of a misreading, which I am trying to minimize; but I guess thats why I should be attacking the easy.

[NoodleyOne]

Attack the easy still. You'll get faster and it will still reinforce the patterns.

[msmith19]

What can you suggest for someone that has done close to 95% of PTs 15-66 in the course of their previous prep?

[A.Taarabt7]

What can you suggest for someone that has done close to 95% of PTs 15-66 in the course of their previous prep?

retake it i assume, if you have done that much then i dont think its possible to remember all or even half of the answers for the tests. Also buy lsat superprep for more practice

[gobosox]

Thanks, Noodley-- this is great... Even though I'm not a retaker. Question-- did you log everything into LSAT QA? Just full PTs? What would you recommend? It seems like a really good resource but I want to know how to maximize its usage.

[99.9luft]

this is a great guide. Having a "felxible mindset" is highly underrated on the LSAT. That's smth hard to teach and personally I think that's what separated the 170s from the 160s. By being baffled at a lack of diagrams on the Zones, i personally screwed myself over. Don't ever do that, whoever's reading this.

[RCinDNA]

Thanks, Noodley.

[NoodleyOne]

Edited the OP for links to the resources.

[RickyDnwhyc]

i liek.

[objection_your_honor]

Thanks for this. Unless I am extraordinarily lucky, my October score will represent my shit performance (Zones). Not interested in applying late, so I'm going to gear up for a June retake.

[ranga93]

Hey Noodley,
Great post, appreciate the humility. I was studying quite a bit over summer but I basically just took PT after PT without much review or drilling. In the end, my LG is fine. But I lose the most points on LR (-4/section). My weaknesses come from flaw and str/weak. I'm going to spend the next couple weeks drilling LR as much as I can. I have about 5 PT's (62-66) that i haven't taken yet.

My main question deals with RC. on the older tests, I did really well on RC (-2 on my worse days), but the newer RC's are definitely tripping me up (late 50's PT). The questions I noticed are significantly trickier. How did you adapt to the newer trickier style of the LSAT, especially in RC?

[Balthy]

I'm not retaking, but still thought this was a great post. Thanks!

[NoodleyOne]

Hey Noodley,
Great post, appreciate the humility. I was studying quite a bit over summer but I basically just took PT after PT without much review or drilling. In the end, my LG is fine. But I lose the most points on LR (-4/section). My weaknesses come from flaw and str/weak. I'm going to spend the next couple weeks drilling LR as much as I can. I have about 5 PT's (62-66) that i haven't taken yet.

My main question deals with RC. on the older tests, I did really well on RC (-2 on my worse days), but the newer RC's are definitely tripping me up (late 50's PT). The questions I noticed are significantly trickier. How did you adapt to the newer trickier style of the LSAT, especially in RC?

I think this is one of those areas where TLS kind of messes up people's perception. In my opinion, I don't think RC has changed much since PT 1 beyond comparative reading. Some of the sections may be harder than before, but I don't think LSAC is tricking anyone with complex wording or anything. My experience may not be the norm, but RC was really variable to me until a few people on here told me to slow down while reading and internalize more of the structure. I went from a wide range of -0 to -6 as a possibility, to my last 7 PTs averaging -1 per test (-0 to -2 range), with most of those tests being in the 60s. It's the same thing I would advise for LR and LG... trust the process. Hard passages can psych people out just like hard games can, but they are still going to be asking the same general questions, so familiarity and confidence will go a long way in that.

Also, if Flaw, Str and Wkn are your weaknesses, Manhattan LR is the book for you. If you don't strut away from a PT thinking all the assumption family questions were your bitch after good studying of the first six chapters coupled with drilling, I'll eat my shoe.

[steel_shot]

Hey Noodley,

I plan on using your guide, and aiming for a mid 170s rewrite in December or February. My only question though, is which is the best way to drill. Obviously I will use the Manhattan/Cambridge combination you used, but do you recommend doing half the questions of the book first, or 50, or 100? For something like MBT/MSS (which I kind of suck at), should I do like 3/4 and save the rest for later? I understand it changes for everyone, just want to get a rough idea so I can start studying again!

Thanks, and really appreciate the guide!

[Theopliske8711]

Noodley,

It terms of a weekly basis, how did you go about a plan of attack? I am doing the Manhattan LR + The Cambridge, but there are simply too many questions and I feel that I have ignored some logic games and reading comps as a result. How do you space out the days?

[NoodleyOne]

Hey Noodley,

I plan on using your guide, and aiming for a mid 170s rewrite in December or February. My only question though, is which is the best way to drill. Obviously I will use the Manhattan/Cambridge combination you used, but do you recommend doing half the questions of the book first, or 50, or 100? For something like MBT/MSS (which I kind of suck at), should I do like 3/4 and save the rest for later? I understand it changes for everyone, just want to get a rough idea so I can start studying again!

Thanks, and really appreciate the guide!

I'd do it until you are showing mastery. I didn't exhaust every prep pack, but I used them extensively, and probably would have exhausted them if I had more time. If you're prepping for December, that won't be possible (most likely), so just target your weak areas and make sure you start seeing the patterns.

Noodley,

It terms of a weekly basis, how did you go about a plan of attack? I am doing the Manhattan LR + The Cambridge, but there are simply too many questions and I feel that I have ignored some logic games and reading comps as a result. How do you space out the days?

I think if you focus exclusively on one section to the point where you're ignoring the others, two steps forward could lead to three steps back. Personally I did a section of each every day to stay sharp, but studied heavily what I was targetting.

[steel_shot]

Hey Noodley,

I plan on using your guide, and aiming for a mid 170s rewrite in December or February. My only question though, is which is the best way to drill. Obviously I will use the Manhattan/Cambridge combination you used, but do you recommend doing half the questions of the book first, or 50, or 100? For something like MBT/MSS (which I kind of suck at), should I do like 3/4 and save the rest for later? I understand it changes for everyone, just want to get a rough idea so I can start studying again!

Thanks, and really appreciate the guide!

I'd do it until you are showing mastery. I didn't exhaust every prep pack, but I used them extensively, and probably would have exhausted them if I had more time. If you're prepping for December, that won't be possible (most likely), so just target your weak areas and make sure you start seeing the patterns.

Awesome, thank you! I may have to wait for the February test then, I'd rather do it properly on my second write, and get that mid 170 score. Good luck with admissions!

[NoodleyOne]

Hey Noodley,

I plan on using your guide, and aiming for a mid 170s rewrite in December or February. My only question though, is which is the best way to drill. Obviously I will use the Manhattan/Cambridge combination you used, but do you recommend doing half the questions of the book first, or 50, or 100? For something like MBT/MSS (which I kind of suck at), should I do like 3/4 and save the rest for later? I understand it changes for everyone, just want to get a rough idea so I can start studying again!

Thanks, and really appreciate the guide!

I'd do it until you are showing mastery. I didn't exhaust every prep pack, but I used them extensively, and probably would have exhausted them if I had more time. If you're prepping for December, that won't be possible (most likely), so just target your weak areas and make sure you start seeing the patterns.

Awesome, thank you! I may have to wait for the February test then, I'd rather do it properly on my second write, and get that mid 170 score. Good luck with admissions!

Thanks, and I would agree that waiting may be the best thing. The thing that pissed me off after June was walking away thinking if I only had more time to prepare I would have been in much better shape. When you go into a test planning to retake, I think you kind of lose a little of your edge.

[desiballa21]

Okay, got my LR study guide and the Cambridge bundle should be here tomorrow. I've got 6 weeks.. Solid on LG and RC. How do you think I should proceed w/ the LR guide & the bundles? Read the chapters then do the corresponding group of questions from the bundle?

[NoodleyOne]

Okay, got my LR study guide and the Cambridge bundle should be here tomorrow. I've got 6 weeks.. Solid on LG and RC. How do you think I should proceed w/ the LR guide & the bundles? Read the chapters then do the corresponding group of questions from the bundle?

Bingo. If you've used lsatqa, you should know where your major trouble spots are. Regardless of that, with this much time I would still recommend doing the chapters on Argument core, Assumptions, Weaken, Strengthen, and flaw. From there you can use a more targeted approach.

[bizzybone1313]

OP, can you estimate the grand total of hours you spent studying for the LSAT (original and retake)? And, are you willing to post your LSAT score when you receive it in a few weeks?

[NoodleyOne]

I'll either post my score or make an alt and never use this account again. Either way, it should be clear what I got.

As far as how much I studied... Shit, counting PTs? 300+ hours easily, maybe close to 500. That being said, getting to the point where I was hitting 170 took me maybe 25-50 not counting PTs. Getting to 177+ consistently? That's where the work was put in.

[carboncopyx]

I'll either post my score or make an alt and never use this account again. Either way, it should be clear what I got.

As far as how much I studied... Shit, counting PTs? 300+ hours easily, maybe close to 500. That being said, getting to the point where I was hitting 170 took me maybe 25-50 not counting PTs. Getting to 177+ consistently? That's where the work was put in.

What was the timeline of progress from 170 onwards for you? Was it incremental (average creeps up slowly to 172, 174, 176, 177+) or was it more of a jump that resulted from your reviewing and study plans after things clicked?

[steel_shot]

Hey Noodley,

I plan on using your guide, and aiming for a mid 170s rewrite in December or February. My only question though, is which is the best way to drill. Obviously I will use the Manhattan/Cambridge combination you used, but do you recommend doing half the questions of the book first, or 50, or 100? For something like MBT/MSS (which I kind of suck at), should I do like 3/4 and save the rest for later? I understand it changes for everyone, just want to get a rough idea so I can start studying again!

Thanks, and really appreciate the guide!

I'd do it until you are showing mastery. I didn't exhaust every prep pack, but I used them extensively, and probably would have exhausted them if I had more time. If you're prepping for December, that won't be possible (most likely), so just target your weak areas and make sure you start seeing the patterns.

Awesome, thank you! I may have to wait for the February test then, I'd rather do it properly on my second write, and get that mid 170 score. Good luck with admissions!

Thanks, and I would agree that waiting may be the best thing. The thing that pissed me off after June was walking away thinking if I only had more time to prepare I would have been in much better shape. When you go into a test planning to retake, I think you kind of lose a little of your edge.

Yeah, I've decided to wait. I just can't focus with the amount of schoolwork, not to mention no grade back yet. I felt the same way about this test, I was doing well, especially for admission to Canadian schools, but I don't like going into things unless I've mastered it. A 168-170 is far from mastery, and I kinda felt like I would be retaking while I wrote. Ah well, maybe I'll end up being an LSAT master like you!

[NoodleyOne]

I'll either post my score or make an alt and never use this account again. Either way, it should be clear what I got.

As far as how much I studied... Shit, counting PTs? 300+ hours easily, maybe close to 500. That being said, getting to the point where I was hitting 170 took me maybe 25-50 not counting PTs. Getting to 177+ consistently? That's where the work was put in.

What was the timeline of progress from 170 onwards for you? Was it incremental (average creeps up slowly to 172, 174, 176, 177+) or was it more of a jump that resulted from your reviewing and study plans after things clicked?

Incremental with some swings up and down. Weaknesses become evident after a lot of tests so even when you score well on a pt it could still be one that is highlighting an issue. Don't get cocky and don't get lazy and you'll get there.