URM -- Need Help with LSAT Prep, 154 Diagnostic Forum

[MovingUnits]

Hey Ya'll

I'm a AA Male URM. Longtime lurker, first-time poster.
4.0 LSAC GPA from HBCU.
Average softs

Beginning my LSAT studies for September/December administration.

Took the PTJune 07' and got a 157. Missed about 7-8 per section and 12 on LG.
Looking to hit the 170+ range before I sit for the LSAT.
Pretty set on HYS/or Columbia/NYU with a hefty scholarship.

Through searching the forums it seems 7Sage, LSAT Trainer, Manhattan LSAT, and Powerscore Bibles are recommended.

How should I use these? I've signed up for the 7Sage Ultimate Plus package and I have some questions...

Should I also use other books, or will 7Sage by itself be sufficient?
Do I really need to do/"fool proof" ALL games from PTs 1-35 like 7Sage recommends?
How long should I take to go through the course, roughly speaking?
Has anyone had success using one of the LSAT Trainer's 3-4 month study schedules using PTs 52-71?
Would one be ok just using the newer PTs? (From 50 to 80)

If there is someone who used 7sage or The LSAT Trainer to reach the 170+ range, would you please DM me or describe how you used these in your prep.

-Thank you in advance

[IExistedOnceBefore]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

[MovingUnits]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

Thank you. Would you recommend one of the corresponding study schedules?

[AJordan]

That's such a personal thing. The LSAT is actually pretty great in that there are a few dozen opportunities to check one's progress individually. If you're feeling lost I would recommend working on just LG until you're consistently -2 or better. From that point a few (6-10ish?) 35 minute sections of LR over the course of a week or so will lay out some data where you can start isolating question types if that's your thing.

Personally, I watched the 7Sage video on every question type of LR and did maybe half of their examples in the follow on for each section. When I then started identifying question types I was missing, I went back and did more of them until certain specific things I was missing started to appear e.g. my incomplete understanding of common flaws and my stubborn refusal to be able to differentiate SA/PSA/NA questions.

I'm not the most adept at picking stuff up quickly so I probably studied, on average, somewhere around 90 minutes a day. For someone better at the test, I started lower than you did, I figure an hour a day is probably enough with some PTs sprinkled in until you're feeling comfortable.

[Slippin' Jimmy]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

Thank you. Would you recommend one of the corresponding study schedules?

I found it helpful for about 1.5 months then I ditched it. I'd recommend using one of the retired schedules since they use older PTs for drilling. You can get it by emailing Mike Kim.

[MovingUnits]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

Thank you. Would you recommend one of the corresponding study schedules?

I found it helpful for about 1.5 months then I ditched it. I'd recommend using one of the retired schedules since they use older PTs for drilling. You can get it by emailing Mike Kim.

Why did you ultimately ditch it?

Also, do you think PTs 52-71 + 72-81 would be enough to sufficiently prep, or is using older materials the only way to get a good score?

[MovingUnits]

That's such a personal thing. The LSAT is actually pretty great in that there are a few dozen opportunities to check one's progress individually. If you're feeling lost I would recommend working on just LG until you're consistently -2 or better. From that point a few (6-10ish?) 35 minute sections of LR over the course of a week or so will lay out some data where you can start isolating question types if that's your thing.

Personally, I watched the 7Sage video on every question type of LR and did maybe half of their examples in the follow on for each section. When I then started identifying question types I was missing, I went back and did more of them until certain specific things I was missing started to appear e.g. my incomplete understanding of common flaws and my stubborn refusal to be able to differentiate SA/PSA/NA questions.

I'm not the most adept at picking stuff up quickly so I probably studied, on average, somewhere around 90 minutes a day. For someone better at the test, I started lower than you did, I figure an hour a day is probably enough with some PTs sprinkled in until you're feeling comfortable.

Thank you!

[IExistedOnceBefore]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

Thank you. Would you recommend one of the corresponding study schedules?

I found it helpful for about 1.5 months then I ditched it. I'd recommend using one of the retired schedules since they use older PTs for drilling. You can get it by emailing Mike Kim.

Why did you ultimately ditch it?

Also, do you think PTs 52-71 + 72-81 would be enough to sufficiently prep, or is using older materials the only way to get a good score?

I did the same. The trainer is great to get a feel for the lsat and basics down. I went through the book itself without doing PTs to get a feel for everything and used older PTs for drilling individual sections. I ditched it about 2 months into prep after going through it.

Then I used the newer tests with some middle ones spliced in to make 5 section tests. When I floundered in RC and LR I used manhattan but it's super personal so you could also use powerscore. LG were super easy for me so I just watched the 7sage videos as needed.

[MovingUnits]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

Thank you. Would you recommend one of the corresponding study schedules?

I found it helpful for about 1.5 months then I ditched it. I'd recommend using one of the retired schedules since they use older PTs for drilling. You can get it by emailing Mike Kim.

Why did you ultimately ditch it?

Also, do you think PTs 52-71 + 72-81 would be enough to sufficiently prep, or is using older materials the only way to get a good score?

I did the same. The trainer is great to get a feel for the lsat and basics down. I went through the book itself without doing PTs to get a feel for everything and used older PTs for drilling individual sections. I ditched it about 2 months into prep after going through it.

Then I used the newer tests with some middle ones spliced in to make 5 section tests. When I floundered in RC and LR I used manhattan but it's super personal so you could also use powerscore. LG were super easy for me so I just watched the 7sage videos as needed.

Do you think it is a must to do older LG? Or would doing the LGs from say 52-61 be enough and then use 62-80 for full tests? I know many people would recommend using older tests (PTs 1-35), and while I get the advantages, there are 80 tests + A,B,C C2 released. If it's not already, at what point will it be ok to just focus on "newer" stuff?

[NotAGolfer]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

Thank you. Would you recommend one of the corresponding study schedules?

I found it helpful for about 1.5 months then I ditched it. I'd recommend using one of the retired schedules since they use older PTs for drilling. You can get it by emailing Mike Kim.

Why did you ultimately ditch it?

Also, do you think PTs 52-71 + 72-81 would be enough to sufficiently prep, or is using older materials the only way to get a good score?

I did the same. The trainer is great to get a feel for the lsat and basics down. I went through the book itself without doing PTs to get a feel for everything and used older PTs for drilling individual sections. I ditched it about 2 months into prep after going through it.

Then I used the newer tests with some middle ones spliced in to make 5 section tests. When I floundered in RC and LR I used manhattan but it's super personal so you could also use powerscore. LG were super easy for me so I just watched the 7sage videos as needed.

Do you think it is a must to do older LG? Or would doing the LGs from say 52-61 be enough and then use 62-80 for full tests? I know many people would recommend using older tests (PTs 1-35), and while I get the advantages, there are 80 tests + A,B,C C2 released. If it's not already, at what point will it be ok to just focus on "newer" stuff?

I used the older PTs (and LGs) in the beginning of my studying. I didn't want to burn up the newer tests until I was better at taking the test (in order to get a more realistic idea of my scoring range).

[AJordan]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

Thank you. Would you recommend one of the corresponding study schedules?

I found it helpful for about 1.5 months then I ditched it. I'd recommend using one of the retired schedules since they use older PTs for drilling. You can get it by emailing Mike Kim.

Why did you ultimately ditch it?

Also, do you think PTs 52-71 + 72-81 would be enough to sufficiently prep, or is using older materials the only way to get a good score?

I did the same. The trainer is great to get a feel for the lsat and basics down. I went through the book itself without doing PTs to get a feel for everything and used older PTs for drilling individual sections. I ditched it about 2 months into prep after going through it.

Then I used the newer tests with some middle ones spliced in to make 5 section tests. When I floundered in RC and LR I used manhattan but it's super personal so you could also use powerscore. LG were super easy for me so I just watched the 7sage videos as needed.

Do you think it is a must to do older LG? Or would doing the LGs from say 52-61 be enough and then use 62-80 for full tests? I know many people would recommend using older tests (PTs 1-35), and while I get the advantages, there are 80 tests + A,B,C C2 released. If it's not already, at what point will it be ok to just focus on "newer" stuff?

I took the LSAT in February and there was a game that was a mimic setup of something I saw in the teens/20s and hadn't seen since. I was damn glad I had done every logic game. It was the fourth game in my set and clearly designed to throw people off. I did it in sub five minutes. The only excuse for not doing them all is your own choices.

[MovingUnits]

Start with the trainer. It lays a good foundation. I started there and then supplement with 7sage/manhattan/powescore as you get deeper into prep. You're in good shape to get a great score.

Thank you. Would you recommend one of the corresponding study schedules?

I found it helpful for about 1.5 months then I ditched it. I'd recommend using one of the retired schedules since they use older PTs for drilling. You can get it by emailing Mike Kim.

Why did you ultimately ditch it?

Also, do you think PTs 52-71 + 72-81 would be enough to sufficiently prep, or is using older materials the only way to get a good score?

I did the same. The trainer is great to get a feel for the lsat and basics down. I went through the book itself without doing PTs to get a feel for everything and used older PTs for drilling individual sections. I ditched it about 2 months into prep after going through it.

Then I used the newer tests with some middle ones spliced in to make 5 section tests. When I floundered in RC and LR I used manhattan but it's super personal so you could also use powerscore. LG were super easy for me so I just watched the 7sage videos as needed.

Do you think it is a must to do older LG? Or would doing the LGs from say 52-61 be enough and then use 62-80 for full tests? I know many people would recommend using older tests (PTs 1-35), and while I get the advantages, there are 80 tests + A,B,C C2 released. If it's not already, at what point will it be ok to just focus on "newer" stuff?

I took the LSAT in February and there was a game that was a mimic setup of something I saw in the teens/20s and hadn't seen since. I was damn glad I had done every logic game. It was the fourth game in my set and clearly designed to throw people off. I did it in sub five minutes. The only excuse for not doing them all is your own choices.

Ok, that makes sense for sure. I didn't realize they repeated older LGs from that long ago... I will plan to do them all. Thank you!